28 Sep 2011 | Jan Bakkes 1 GLIMP Global integrated assessment to support the EU’s future environmental policies

28 Sep 2011 | Jan Bakkes

1

GLIMP

Global integrated assessment to support the EU’s future environmental policies

28 Sep 2011 | Jan Bakkes

2

Content

PurposeScoping the exerciseSample insightsStrenghts & weaknesses of the

approach

28 Sep 2011 | Jan Bakkes3

Purpose of GLIMP

To illuminate global developments that may become important for future environmental policies of the European Commission

New issues not yet firmly on the policy agenda


The Call for Tender Objectives:“. . . a comprehensive modelling framework able to investigate

environmental issues at a global and European scale, providing a detailed and geographically explicit representation of the major feedback mechanisms in the biophysical system”

Task 1: establish modelling framework

Task 2: Modelling of policy scenarios“. . . run scenarios that can serve as a basis for the definition of policy

options in the context of the work on Climate Change (Adaptation and Mitigation), Water Framework Directive and in particular Water Scarcity and Droughts, Biodiversity and Nature protection, Land use and soil, agriculture and forestry use, etc.”

Steering Group of Commission officials and external experts


Assignment

PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

– subcontracting LEI (Agricultural economy & trade)

– subcontracting UBC Fisheries (Vancouver)

Two year contract: 2010-2011


Scoping

1. Brainstorm: → 40 potential issues

2. Feasibility & significance: → 16 thumbnail proposals

3. Prioritization based on interest: → 6 short studies


40 potential issues for GLIMP

For example

EU’s food & feed dependencies & vulnerabilities Energy from Sahara and Sub-Saharan Africa Water stress in & outside the EU; CAP & water footprint; Mediterranean as innovation

area Aging population changing environmental concerns worldwide Achieving post 2015 MDG goals Trade & resource effects from polar ice melt

Ecosystem collapse leading to migration Global safe landing scenario, EU leading the way New substances (nano compounds, animal medicines, …)

Changing international transfer matrix for environmental burden of disease Waste exports Mega EU extension (Turkey, Ukraine, Mediterranean)

Large, consumer responsive retailers as instrument of change Agricultural intensity ↔ ecosystem goods & services (moximizing some, or optimal

mix) …..


Criteria for feasibility & significance (40 → 16)

1. Environmental significance1. magnitude of risk; 2. immediate saliency vs long-term strategic importance; 3. geographical scale; 4. complexity & possibility to identify & isolate key drivers

2. Novelty3. Problem, drivers or solutions controversial?4. Feasibility of quantitative assessment

And prospects to place place results in policy perspective EU policy relevance, e.g. conceivable regulatory solutions Have policy recommendations already been formulated?


Issues retained for GLIMP0. ‘No new policies’ baseline

and

1. Biomass use for energy, fuel, other uses

2. Scarce resources: fish and phosphate

3. Climate Policies and Land Use policies

4. Environmental impacts of reform of agricultural and trade policies

5. Forests and Forestry

6. EU Resource Efficiency Perspectives in a Global Context (fossil energy; arable land; fresh water; phospate; fish)


Examples of emerging insights

Phosphate: megatrend cannot be altered; EU should think of adaptation

Resource efficiency policy and climate change policies have important synergies but Resorce Efficiency policy by itself does not reach climate targets

CAP reform will have hardly noticeable effects outside the EU. But a worldwide policy to remove harmful subisidies from agriculture will have large beneficial effects for the environment.

And also 34 interesting new topics to be investigated by others


Phosphorus fertilizer use

Envisaged policies: 40% increase. Global Resource Efficiency + ambitious climate policy: partial offset by phosphorus requirements

for bio-energy crops.


Method

Weak Difficult to agree on focus (“blank cheque”) Sometimes unrealistic ideas about potential of models

Strong & Weak Tested tools & team, investigating new questions

Strong Time allocated to think strategically Quasi-objective material as ‘campfire’ Ideas for alliances within European Commission, or fights to

pick

Documents

28 Sep 2011 | Jan Bakkes 1 GLIMP Global integrated assessment to support the EU’s future environmental policies