How to Achieve Food Security in a World of Growing Scarcity: Role of Technology Development Strategies

Feeding the World: Sustainable Agriculture & Innovation in the 21st Century

Claudia Ringler, International Food Policy Research Institute Rio + 20 Official Side Event RioCentro, June 16, 2012

The State of Food Security

One billion food insecure

Rising/fluctuating food prices

Scarcity of land and water

Competition from bioenergy

Climate change

Drivers of Agricultural Growth and Food Security

Demand drivers

Population growth: 9 billion people in 2050

Urbanization: 2010 = 52% urban; 2050 = 78% urban

Income growth

Biofuels and bioenergy

• GHG mitigation and carbon sequestration

• Conservation and biodiversity

Number of people added annually, by region

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1975

-80

1980

-85

1985

-90

1990

-95

1995

-00

2000

-05

2005

-10

2010

-15

2015

-20

2020

-25

2025

-30

2030

-35

2035

-40

2040

-45

2045

-50

2050

-55

2055

-60

2060

-65

2065

-70

2070

-75

2075

-80

2080

-85

2085

-90

2090

-95

2095

-00

World Less developed Region

Least developed Region North America

Europe

Source: UN (2011)

Drivers of Agricultural Growth and Food Security

Supply drivers

Water and land scarcity

Climate change

Investment in agricultural research

Science and technology policy

Management and governance reform

Impact of Climate Change in 2050

Overall production change in shown existing areas: -11.2%

Rainfed maize (MIROC/A1B)

Source: IFPRI IMPACT simulations (Nelson et al. 2010)

Major Consequences

Rapid growth in meat consumption and demand for grains for feed

Half of growth in grain demand will be for livestock

Significant water/land use for energy production

Intense pressure on land and water

Decreasing crop productivity

Increase in prices for cereals and meats

Impact on caloric availability

Impact on food security for those who spend a large share of their income on food

Large number of international land deals, chiefly focused on biofuels & agriculture

Source: http://landportal.info/landmatrix

Projected increase in per capita meat consumption

Source: IFPRI IMPACT Simulations

20

11

28

83

58

11

13

24

4

19

0 20 40 60 80 100

Central and W Asia / N Africa

Subsaharan Africa

East + South Asia / Pacific

N Am / Europe

Latin Am / Carib

kg/person per year

2000 2000-2050

Productivity Issues: R&D

Growth rate of yields has been slowing in response to

a slowdown of agriculture R&D spending

Agricultural Technologies

Potential to improve:

Agricultural production & consumption

Food security

Trade

Environmental quality

Stalled by:

Polarized debate on high intensity vs. low input

Lack of understanding of the impacts of specific technologies at a disaggregated level

Technology Assessment Scope

Global & Regional

Nine Technologies

Three Crops

• Wheat

• Rice

• Maize

• Zero Tillage • Integrated Soil Fertility

Management • Irrigation Technologies • Water Harvesting • Drought Tolerance • Heat tolerance • Nitrogen Use Efficiency • Precision Agriculture • Laser Land Leveling • Organic Agriculture

352 exploitable answers

60% maize, 20% rice, 20% wheat

Technologies / Crops Maize Rice Wheat Total

Conventional breeding: heat and drought tolerance 16 7 12 35

Conventional breeding: nitrogen use efficiency 4 2 2 8

Genetically modified crops: Bt maize 37 37

Genetically modified crops: heat and drought tolerance 9 4 6 19

Genetically modified crops: nitrogen use efficiency 2 2 4

Integrated soil fertility management 38 11 8 57

Drip/sprinkler irrigation 12 3 3 18

Furrow irrigation 10 10 5 25

Laser land leveling 3 1 4

Organic agriculture 29 11 5 45

Precision agriculture 10 7 9 26

Water harvesting 15 4 4 23

Zero tillage 34 6 11 51

Total 214 70 68 352

E-survey (300 experts) Typology of Respondents and Answers

Results – Impacts on Yields

Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

Results – Impacts on Production Costs

Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

Profitability Results – by Crop / Region

Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

Results – Impacts on Soil Erosion

Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

Results – Impacts on Water Quality

Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

Results – Impacts on Energy Consumption

Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

Results – Impacts on Fertilizer Use

Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

DSSAT – Crop Modeling System

MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Crop choice

Cropping

Planting

Inorganic fertilizer

Organic amendment

Irrigation

Tillage

Residue

Harvest

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

Climate – Historic (1901-2005)

– Future (2030s, 2050s, 2080s)

– CO2 concentration

Soil quality

Land-use history

OUTPUTS

Biomass

Yield

Water balance and productivity

Nitrogen balance and productivity

Soil carbon sequestration

2040

6080

100

0

2

4

6

8

10

N/A0

2040

Yield(t/ha)

IrrigationThreshold (%)

Improved variety

N Fertilizer Application(kg[N]/ha)

Planting in November

Regional/Site-specific yield responses

DSSAT – crop modeling system

Management Scenarios

Baseline • Site-specific baseline inorganic fertilizer application rate

• For maize, location-specific yield discount factor due to unmanaged pest damage where Bt maize is not adopted

• Furrow irrigation, where irrigation is adopted

• Sub-optimal planting density & sub-optimal planting window

• Conventional tillage

• Representative varieties for latitude x altitude zones

Technology scenarios • Specific representation of each technology

• Area of adoption in 2050 depends on technology

Climate change scenario in 2050 • MIROC A1B (without CO2 fertilization)

Measure of Technology Yield Impact (%) in 2050

For a given country, If technology is new (i.e. not adopted in 2000)

If technology already adopted in 2000 (=baseline)

– Bt maize: Brazil, USA, Argentina, China, India

– No-till: Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil, Australia, Uruguay, New Zealand

𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 % = 𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2050 − 𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2050

𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2000× 100

𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 % = 𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2050

𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2000× 100

Yield change (%), Global effect in 2050 (MIROC A1B)

(-28.8)

(-18.9)

(-13.5)

Numbers in brackets indicate water savings; assumption was that water demands can be fully met

Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

Yield change (%), Global effect in 2050 (MIROC A1B)

Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

MAIZE

INTEGRATED SOIL FERTILITY MANAGEMENT

IRRIGATED

RAINFED

Yield Impact (%)

< -70

-69 - -60

-59 - -50

-49 - -40

-39 - -30

-29 - -20

-19 - -15

-14 - -10

-9 - -5

-4 - 0

1 - 5

6 - 10

11 - 15

16 - 20

21 - 30

31 - 40

41 - 50

51 - 60

61 - 70

> 70

Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

Yield change (%), Latin America & Caribbean in 2050 (MIROC A1B)

WHEAT

PRECISION AGRICULTURE

IRRIGATED

RAINFED

Yield Impact (%)

< -70

-69 - -60

-59 - -50

-49 - -40

-39 - -30

-29 - -20

-19 - -15

-14 - -10

-9 - -5

-4 - 0

1 - 5

6 - 10

11 - 15

16 - 20

21 - 30

31 - 40

41 - 50

51 - 60

61 - 70

> 70

Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

Linking DSSAT & IMPACT

DSSAT

Technology strategy (combination of

different practices)

Corresponding geographically

differentiated yield effects

IMPACT

Food demand and supply

Effects on Global prices and trade

Food security and malnutrition

Percent Change in World Prices of Maize between 2010 and 2050

Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

Percent Change in World Prices of Rice between 2000 and 2050

Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

Percent Change in World Prices of Wheat between 2010 and 2050

Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

Percent change from 2010 to 2050

Reference (MIROC A1b)

Drought Tolerance

Heat Tolerance

Integrated SFM

No Till

N Use Efficiency

Precision Ag

Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

Percent Change in kilocalorie availability per capita per day between 2010 and 2050

-5.0%

-4.5%

-4.0%

-3.5%

-3.0%

-2.5%

-2.0%

-1.5%

-1.0%

-0.5%

0.0%

Percent difference from reference in 2050

Drought Tolerance

Heat Tolerance

Integrated SFM

No Till

N Use Efficiency

Precision Ag

Percent Change in the Number of Malnourished Children 2050, compared to reference run

Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

Conclusions

Agricultural technology investments—including both “advanced” and “traditional” technologies/management practices are a game changer in terms of yield improvements and national and global food security

We now can model disaggregated/locale-specific technology impacts

While biophysical potential often exists to significantly increase yields, institutions, governance systems, political will, and poor rural infrastructure remain obstacles to achieving the full technological potential