IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jageco/v69y2018i3p627-645.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Addressing Uncertainty in Efficient Mitigation of Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Author

Listed:
  • Vera Eory
  • Cairistiona F. E. Topp
  • Adam Butler
  • Dominic Moran

Abstract

The agricultural sector, as an important source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, is under pressure to reduce its contribution to climate change. Decisions on financing and regulating agricultural GHG mitigation are often informed by cost‐effectiveness analysis of the potential GHG reduction in the sector. A commonly used tool for such analysis is the bottom‐up marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) which assesses mitigation options and calculates their cumulative cost‐effective mitigation potential. MACCs are largely deterministic, typically not reflecting uncertainties in underlying input variables. We analyse the uncertainty of GHG mitigation estimates in a bottom‐up MACC for agriculture, for those uncertainties capable of quantitative assessment. Our analysis identifies the sources and types of uncertainties in the cost‐effectiveness analysis and estimates the statistical uncertainty of the results by propagating uncertainty through the MACC via Monte Carlo analysis. For the case of Scottish agriculture, the uncertainty of the cost‐effective abatement potential from agricultural land, as expressed by the coefficient of variation, was between 9.6% and 107.3% across scenarios. This means that the probability of the actual abatement being less than half of the estimated abatement ranged from

Suggested Citation

  • Vera Eory & Cairistiona F. E. Topp & Adam Butler & Dominic Moran, 2018. "Addressing Uncertainty in Efficient Mitigation of Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(3), pages 627-645, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jageco:v:69:y:2018:i:3:p:627-645
    DOI: 10.1111/1477-9552.12269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12269
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baker, Erin & Chon, Haewon & Keisler, Jeffrey, 2009. "Advanced solar R&D: Combining economic analysis with expert elicitations to inform climate policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(Supplemen), pages 37-49.
    2. Meyer-Aurich, Andreas & Schattauer, Alexander & Hellebrand, Hans Jürgen & Klauss, Hilde & Plöchl, Matthias & Berg, Werner, 2012. "Impact of uncertainties on greenhouse gas mitigation potential of biogas production from agricultural resources," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 277-284.
    3. Hallegatte, Stephane & Shah, Ankur & Lempert, Robert & Brown, Casey & Gill, Stuart, 2012. "Investment decision making under deep uncertainty -- application to climate change," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6193, The World Bank.
    4. Moran, Dominic & MacLeod, Michael J. & Wall, Eileen & Eory, Vera & McVittie, Alistair & Barnes, Andrew Peter & Rees, Bob & Smith, Peter & Moxey, Andrew, 2009. "Marginal abatement cost curves for UK agriculture, forestry, land-use and land-use change sector out to 2022," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51065, Agricultural Economics Society.
    5. Peterson, Sonja, 2006. "Uncertainty and economic analysis of climate change: a survey of approaches and findings," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 3778, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    6. Price, Richard & Thornton, Simeon & Nelson, Stephen, 2007. "The Social Cost of Carbon and the Shadow Price of Carbon: what they are, and how to use them in economic appraisal in the UK," MPRA Paper 74976, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Fabian Kesicki & Paul Ekins, 2012. "Marginal abatement cost curves: a call for caution," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 219-236, March.
    8. Thomas Berger & Christian Troost, 2014. "Agent-based Modelling of Climate Adaptation and Mitigation Options in Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 323-348, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mykola Gusti & Nicklas Forsell & Petr Havlik & Nikolay Khabarov & Florian Kraxner & Michael Obersteiner, 2019. "The sensitivity of the costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) to future socioeconomic drivers and its implications for mitigation policy design," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 1123-1141, August.
    2. Pexas, Georgios & Mackenzie, Stephen G. & Wallace, Michael & Kyriazakis, Ilias, 2020. "Cost-effectiveness of environmental impact abatement measures in a European pig production system," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eory, Vera & Topp, Cairistiona F. E. & Moran, Dominic & Butler, Adam, 2014. "Assessing uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness of agricultural greenhouse gas mitigation," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170784, Agricultural Economics Society.
    2. Eory, Vera, 2015. "Evaluating the use of marginal abatement cost curves applied to greenhouse gas abatement in agriculture," Working Papers 199777, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    3. Anja Hansen & Jörn Budde & Yusuf Nadi Karatay & Annette Prochnow, 2016. "CUDe —Carbon Utilization Degree as an Indicator for Sustainable Biomass Use," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, October.
    4. Bosetti, Valentina & Catenacci, Michela & Fiorese, Giulia & Verdolini, Elena, 2012. "The future prospect of PV and CSP solar technologies: An expert elicitation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 308-317.
    5. Sinéad O’Keeffe & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Energy Crops in Regional Biogas Systems: An Integrative Spatial LCA to Assess the Influence of Crop Mix and Location on Cultivation GHG Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.
    6. John Foster & Liam Wagner & Phil Wild & Junhua Zhao & Lucas Skoofa & Craig Froome, 2011. "Market and Economic Modelling of the Intelligent Grid: End of Year Report 2009," Energy Economics and Management Group Working Papers 09, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    7. Koppelaar, Rembrandt H.E.M. & Keirstead, James & Shah, Nilay & Woods, Jeremy, 2016. "A review of policy analysis purpose and capabilities of electricity system models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 1531-1544.
    8. Saujot, Mathieu & Lefèvre, Benoit, 2016. "The next generation of urban MACCs. Reassessing the cost-effectiveness of urban mitigation options by integrating a systemic approach and social costs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 124-138.
    9. Baker, Erin & Solak, Senay, 2011. "Climate change and optimal energy technology R&D policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(2), pages 442-454, September.
    10. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Salo, Ahti, 2016. "Finding Common Ground when Experts Disagree: Belief Dominance over Portfolios of Alternatives," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 243147, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    11. Martina Linnenluecke & Andrew Griffiths & Peter Mumby, 2015. "Executives’ engagement with climate science and perceived need for business adaptation to climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 321-333, July.
    12. Theresa Stahlke, 2020. "The impact of the Clean Development Mechanism on developing countries’ commitment to mitigate climate change and its implications for the future," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 107-125, January.
    13. Mort Webster & Karen Fisher-Vanden & David Popp & Nidhi Santen, 2017. "Should We Give Up after Solyndra? Optimal Technology R&D Portfolios under Uncertainty," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(S1), pages 123-151.
    14. Annika Styczynski & Jedamiah Wolf & Somdatta Tah & Arnab Bose, 2014. "When decision-making processes fail: an argument for robust climate adaptation planning in the face of uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 478-491, December.
    15. Moallemi, Enayat A. & Elsawah, Sondoss & Ryan, Michael J., 2020. "Robust decision making and Epoch–Era analysis: A comparison of two robustness frameworks for decision-making under uncertainty," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    16. Hallegatte, Stephane, 2012. "An exploration of the link between development, economic growth, and natural risk," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6216, The World Bank.
    17. Verdolini, Elena & Anadon, Laura Diaz & Lu, Jiaqi & Nemet, Gregory F., 2015. "The effects of expert selection, elicitation design, and R&D assumptions on experts' estimates of the future costs of photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 233-243.
    18. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Anadon, Laura Diaz & Henrion, Max & Aleluia Reis, Lara, 2015. "Future costs of key low-carbon energy technologies: Harmonization and aggregation of energy technology expert elicitation data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 219-232.
    19. Erin Baker & Valentina Bosetti & Ahti Salo, 2017. "Finding common ground when experts disagree: Robust portfolio decision analysis," Working Papers 2017/11, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    20. Simon Dietz & Samuel Fankhauser, 2009. "Environmental prices, uncertainty and learning," GRI Working Papers 10, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jageco:v:69:y:2018:i:3:p:627-645. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-857X .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.