IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v142y2016icp70-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scenarios for Australian agricultural production and land use to 2050

Author

Listed:
  • Grundy, Michael J.
  • Bryan, Brett A.
  • Nolan, Martin
  • Battaglia, Michael
  • Hatfield-Dodds, Steve
  • Connor, Jeffery D.
  • Keating, Brian A.

Abstract

Australian agricultural land use and production have evolved within an economic and environmental context that may change substantially in terms of productivity rates, resource scarcity and degradation, greenhouse gas abatement policy, climate change, and global demand. We used an integrated systems modelling approach to explore the response of Australian land use and agricultural production to these changes from 2013 to 2050. We found potentially large transitions in spatial and temporal patterns of land use, agricultural production, output rates, and profitability. New land uses such as carbon plantings, biofuels and bioenergy, and environmental plantings competed with food and fibre production, reducing its area. Global outlooks, including the strength of action on climate change and population assumptions, had a strong influence. Capacity constraints and adoption inertia reduced and delayed land use change. Agricultural production and land use were sensitive to productivity assumptions. Despite the competition for land from new land uses, agricultural production increased under most settings, with greatest impact from land use transitions concentrated on livestock production. Agricultural profits also increased under most settings due to higher prices and output rates. Negligible land use change was observed with carbon payments below $50 per tCO2-e, and significant change did not occur before 2030 in any but the unconstrained, high-abatement scenarios. We conclude that transformative land use change is plausible but high levels of food/fibre production can co-exist with non-food land uses motivated by market responses to global change and domestic policy. Thereby, the Australian land sector can continue its significant contribution to global food security while responding to new economic opportunities. Policy settings can influence these outcomes through reducing infrastructure constraints, strategies for enhancing adoption, and research and development in agricultural technology and productivity. Due to the long time frames required to change attitudes and land use and management practices, consideration of the possible impacts of global change on agriculture and potential policy responses is timely.

Suggested Citation

  • Grundy, Michael J. & Bryan, Brett A. & Nolan, Martin & Battaglia, Michael & Hatfield-Dodds, Steve & Connor, Jeffery D. & Keating, Brian A., 2016. "Scenarios for Australian agricultural production and land use to 2050," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 70-83.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:142:y:2016:i:c:p:70-83
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2015.11.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X15300482
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benitez, Pablo C. & McCallum, Ian & Obersteiner, Michael & Yamagata, Yoshiki, 2007. "Global potential for carbon sequestration: Geographical distribution, country risk and policy implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 572-583, January.
    2. Rutten, Martine & van Dijk, Michiel & van Rooij, Wilbert & Hilderink, Henk, 2014. "Land Use Dynamics, Climate Change, and Food Security in Vietnam: A Global-to-local Modeling Approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 29-46.
    3. Hayward, Jennifer A. & Graham, Paul W., 2013. "A global and local endogenous experience curve model for projecting future uptake and cost of electricity generation technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 537-548.
    4. Sakschewski, Boris & von Bloh, Werner & Huber, Veronika & Müller, Christoph & Bondeau, Alberte, 2014. "Feeding 10 billion people under climate change: How large is the production gap of current agricultural systems?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 288(C), pages 103-111.
    5. Schneider, Uwe A. & McCarl, Bruce A. & Schmid, Erwin, 2007. "Agricultural sector analysis on greenhouse gas mitigation in US agriculture and forestry," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 128-140, May.
    6. Kathy Hibbard & Anthony Janetos, 2013. "The regional nature of global challenges: a need and strategy for integrated regional modeling," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 565-577, June.
    7. Haim, David & White, Eric M. & Alig, Ralph J., 2014. "Permanence of agricultural afforestation for carbon sequestration under stylized carbon markets in the U.S," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 12-21.
    8. Ivanic, Maros & Martin, Will & Zaman, Hassan, 2012. "Estimating the Short-Run Poverty Impacts of the 2010–11 Surge in Food Prices," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(11), pages 2302-2317.
    9. Harvey, Mark & Pilgrim, Sarah, 2011. "The new competition for land: Food, energy, and climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(S1), pages 40-51.
    10. Kym Anderson & Maros Ivanic & William J. Martin, 2014. "Food Price Spikes, Price Insulation, and Poverty," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Food Price Volatility, pages 311-339, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Hughes, Neal & Lawson, Kenton & Davidson, Alistair & Jackson, Tom & Sheng, Yu, 2011. "Productivity pathways: climate-adjusted production frontiers for the Australian broadacre cropping industry," 2011 Conference (55th), February 8-11, 2011, Melbourne, Australia 100563, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. Gordon, Line J. & Finlayson, C. Max & Falkenmark, Malin, 2010. "Managing water in agriculture for food production and other ecosystem services," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(4), pages 512-519, April.
    13. Jonathan Winsten & Sarah Walker & Sandra Brown & Sean Grimland, 2011. "Estimating carbon supply curves from afforestation of agricultural land in the Northeastern U.S," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 16(8), pages 925-942, December.
    14. Martin Ravallion & Shaohua Chen & Prem Sangraula, 2009. "Dollar a Day Revisited," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 23(2), pages 163-184, June.
    15. Pardey, Philip G. & Beddow, Jason M. & Hurley, Terrance M. & Beatty, Timothy K.M. & Eidman, Vernon R., 2014. "A Bounds Analysis of World Food Futures: Global Agriculture Through to 2050," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(4), October.
    16. Jesse H. Ausubel & Iddo K. Wernick & Paul E. Waggoner, 2013. "Peak Farmland and the Prospect for Land Sparing," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 38, pages 221-242, February.
    17. Christoph Schmitz & Hans van Meijl & Page Kyle & Gerald C. Nelson & Shinichiro Fujimori & Angelo Gurgel & Petr Havlik & Edwina Heyhoe & Daniel Mason d'Croz & Alexander Popp & Ron Sands & Andrzej Tabea, 2014. "Land-use change trajectories up to 2050: insights from a global agro-economic model comparison," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 69-84, January.
    18. Kevin Hanslow, 2010. "NIAM: National Integrated Assessment Model - Proof-of-concept development and application," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-210, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    19. Elberg Nielsen, Anne Sofie & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Alig, Ralph J., 2014. "Mitigating climate change through afforestation: New cost estimates for the United States," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 83-98.
    20. Harvey, Mark & Pilgrim, Sarah, 2011. "The new competition for land: Food, energy, and climate change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(Supplemen), pages 40-51, January.
    21. Bryan, Brett Anthony & Crossman, Neville David, 2013. "Impact of multiple interacting financial incentives on land use change and the supply of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 60-72.
    22. Nelson, Gerald C. & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Palazzo, Amanda & Gray, Ian & Ingersoll, Christina & Robertson, Richard & Tokgoz, Simla & Zhu, Tingju & Sulser, Timothy B. & Ringler, Claudia & Msangi, Siwa & , 2010. "Food security, farming, and climate change to 2050: Scenarios, results, policy options," Research reports Gerald C. Nelson, et al., International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    23. Erb, Karl-Heinz & Haberl, Helmut & Plutzar, Christoph, 2012. "Dependency of global primary bioenergy crop potentials in 2050 on food systems, yields, biodiversity conservation and political stability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 260-269.
    24. Odegard, I.Y.R. & van der Voet, E., 2014. "The future of food — Scenarios and the effect on natural resource use in agriculture in 2050," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 51-59.
    25. Alexander Popp & Steven Rose & Katherine Calvin & Detlef Vuuren & Jan Dietrich & Marshall Wise & Elke Stehfest & Florian Humpenöder & Page Kyle & Jasper Vliet & Nico Bauer & Hermann Lotze-Campen & Dav, 2014. "Land-use transition for bioenergy and climate stabilization: model comparison of drivers, impacts and interactions with other land use based mitigation options," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 495-509, April.
    26. Martin Lampe & Dirk Willenbockel & Helal Ahammad & Elodie Blanc & Yongxia Cai & Katherine Calvin & Shinichiro Fujimori & Tomoko Hasegawa & Petr Havlik & Edwina Heyhoe & Page Kyle & Hermann Lotze-Campe, 2014. "Why do global long-term scenarios for agriculture differ? An overview of the AgMIP Global Economic Model Intercomparison," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 3-20, January.
    27. Detlef Vuuren & Jae Edmonds & Mikiko Kainuma & Keywan Riahi & Allison Thomson & Kathy Hibbard & George Hurtt & Tom Kram & Volker Krey & Jean-Francois Lamarque & Toshihiko Masui & Malte Meinshausen & N, 2011. "The representative concentration pathways: an overview," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 5-31, November.
    28. Eric Audsley & Mirek Trnka & Santiago Sabaté & Joan Maspons & Anabel Sanchez & Daniel Sandars & Jan Balek & Kerry Pearn, 2015. "Interactively modelling land profitability to estimate European agricultural and forest land use under future scenarios of climate, socio-economics and adaptation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 128(3), pages 215-227, February.
    29. P. Polglase & A. Reeson & C. Hawkins & K. Paul & A. Siggins & J. Turner & D. Crawford & T. Jovanovic & T. Hobbs & K. Opie & J. Carwardine & A. Almeida, 2013. "Potential for forest carbon plantings to offset greenhouse emissions in Australia: economics and constraints to implementation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 161-175, November.
    30. Baffes, John & De Gorter, Harry, 2005. "Disciplining agricultural support through decoupling," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3533, The World Bank.
    31. Philip G. Pardey & Julian M. Alston & Connie Chan-Kang, 2013. "Public agricultural R&D over the past half century: an emerging new world order," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 103-113, November.
    32. Colin A. Carter & Gordon C. Rausser & Aaron Smith, 2011. "Commodity Booms and Busts," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 87-118, October.
    33. Dong, Ming & Bryan, Brett A. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Nolan, Martin & Gao, Lei, 2015. "Land use mapping error introduces strongly-localised, scale-dependent uncertainty into land use and ecosystem services modelling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 63-74.
    34. Monjardino, M. & McBeath, T. & Ouzman, J. & Llewellyn, R. & Jones, B., 2015. "Farmer risk-aversion limits closure of yield and profit gaps: A study of nitrogen management in the southern Australian wheatbelt," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 108-118.
    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. Mosnier, Claire & Duclos, Anne & Agabriel, Jacques & Gac, Armelle, 2017. "What prospective scenarios for 2035 will be compatible with reduced impact of French beef and dairy farm on climate change?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 193-201.

    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:eee:agisys:v:142:y:2016:i:c:p:70-83. 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: (Haili He). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    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.