1 / 34

The future of the land

The future of the land. Making ends meet Pathways to reconcile global food, energy, climate and biodiversity goals A PBL contribution to Rio+20. Presentation overview Who we are and what we do The PBL approach to forward looking studies Making ends meet Why this study

silvio
Télécharger la présentation

The future of the land

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The future of the land

  2. Making ends meetPathways to reconcile global food, energy, climate and biodiversity goalsA PBL contribution to Rio+20

  3. Presentation overview • Who we are and what we do • The PBL approach to forward looking studies • Making ends meet • Why this study • What we found (focus on agriculture and food) • What we learnt • What we want to learn better • Conclusions

  4. Who we are and what we do • PBL’s Core business: • Strategic policy analysis in the field of environment, nature and spatial planning... • Core research characteristics and values • Outlook studies, evaluations • Integrated approach • Solicited and unsolicited research • Policy relevance • Independent • Scientifically sound • Source: PBL Mission Statement (www.pbl.nl/en/aboutpbl)

  5. Examples • Bio-energy (direct and indirect effects) • EU common agricultural policy reform (EURURALIS) • IPCC Assessment Reports • OECD environmental outlook 2008, 2012 • UNEP GEO-3, GEO-4 • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment • International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science & Technology for Development (IAASTD) • Biodiversity assessments (GBO-2, GBO-3, Rethinking..) • Club of Rome (Growing within limits) • Impacts of food consumption & production (Protein Puzzle) • Resource Efficiency (EU flagship initiative) • Rio+20 (Backcasting from the future)

  6. PBL forward looking studies • Diverse approaches, but typically: • Strategic: time horizon until 2030, 2050, sometimes 2100 • Integrated: multiple sectors & dimensions, but mostly: • focus on environmental pressures & impacts (e.g. climate, biodiversity, N,P, water) • Scenarios with different social, economic, policy contexts • Quantitative (emphasis on biophysical world) • Global analysis (often with refinements for EU or Netherlands) • Current trend in new research projects: • Seeking improved balance between social, economic and environmental impacts • More attention for policy options and governance issues

  7. Making ends meet Pathways to reconcile global food, energy, climate and biodiversity goals A PBL contribution to Rio+20 FAO, Rome 5 April, 2011 Detlef van Vuuren, Marcel Kok, Stefan van der Esch, Michel Jeuken, Paul Lucas, Anne Gerdien Prins, Maurits van den Berg, Rob Alkemade, Frank Biermann (VU/IVM), Nicolien van der Gijp (VU/IVM), Henk Hilderink, Tom Kram, Claire Melamed (ODI), Philipp Pattberg (VU/IVM), Andrew Scott (ODI), Elke Stehfest, Bert de Vries, Dirk-Willem te Velde (ODI), Steve Wiggins (ODI)

  8. 1992: World leaders adopt the Rio-declaration • 1972: Stockholm conference (UN Conference on the Human Environment) • UNEP 1992: Translation into agenda of action – Agenda 21 / Rio conventions 2012: Rio+20 – reflections on achievements, explore new trajectories?

  9. What did Rio achieve? • Range of ambitious targets in international policies • Progress in creating institutions

  10. What did Rio achieve? • Range of ambitious targets in international policies • Progress in creating institutions • But little progress ‘on the ground’

  11. Little progress in implementing Rio-declaration • Principle 5 : all states and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development; • Principle 6 : states shall cooperate to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's ecosystem.

  12. Why? • Not an elaborated vision where to go… • Short-term priorities overwhelm long-term ambitions • Different interests • Fragmented policies • Incentive structure • .. Very little progress in implementing Rio-declaration • Principle 5 : all states and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development; • Principle 6 : states shall cooperate to conserve, protect and restore the health and integrity of the Earth's ecosystem.

  13. “What is sorely lacking in the Rio+20 process is a vision of where we want to be in 2050” Brice Lalonde Special Envoy for Rio+20

  14. PBL Rio+20 project – contribute to vision development by exploring future pathways • Main project objective: to evaluate what is needed to achieve a set of ambitious sustainable development targets by 2050 simultaneously. • What pathways would be consistent with achieving the targets? • What do long-term targets imply for near-term policy priorities? • What institutional framework and governance mechanisms are required?

  15. “Making ends meet”

  16. Trend Transformative action and policy Challenge What is needed in the next 10 years Sustainable Development goals Approach • Scenario analysis • Interlinked modelling of energy, land-use, climate, (water), air pollution, nitrogen • Backcasting:What does it take to meet the targets 2010 2050

  17. Thematic relations between the main themes addressed Forestry

  18. IMAGE 2.4 Framework (Bouwman et al., 2006) Scenario assumptions LEITAP Globio 3 P, N

  19. Halt! 2oC Full access

  20. Building a vision for 2050 • Business-as-usual does not get close…. and seems not attractive.

  21. The pathways (land related) 10 juni 2014

  22. Production increase and/or improvement in equity to access to food Global technology Trend Local technology 2010 Poverty line 10 juni 2014

  23. Implications of pathways for crop yield increase 10 juni 2014

  24. Effects of pathways achieving biodiversity targets Reduce infrastructure expansion Expand protected areas Reduce consumption and waste Increase agricultural productivity Restore abandoned lands Reduce nitrogen emissions Climate change Reduce nature fragmentation

  25. Key elements to achieve the goals • Sustainable intensification • Technologies • Enablingconditions (acces to credit, infrastructure, land tenure, etc) • Manage competing claims • Proper land use planning • Awareness, incentives andregulations • More robust & sustainable food supply system • Climateproof • Wastesandlosses • Consumer behaviour • Reducepricevolatility (stocks, trade, futures)

  26. Why not? • Not an elaborated vision where to go… • Short-term priorities overwhelm long-term ambitions • Different interests • Fragmented policies • Lack of incentive structure • ..

  27. How to achieve this • Long-term vision + short-term targets • Work on three routes: • International agreements as far possible • At mininum global consensus on vision • Rules of the game (e.g. WTO) • Local responsibility / leave enough freedom • Change normalcy of the system: • How people measure their progress • Accounting • Use the ‘energetic society’/bottom-up

  28. ‘Energetic society’ - a PBL storyline under construction See society as crucial ‘agent of change’ See states as ‘enabling states’ Use regulatory powers: ‘regulatory state’ Don’t optimize, create powerful incentives Improve monitoring and feedback (learning)

  29. Can international policies support a global ‘energetic society’? Some ideas… • Do not aim to exchange ‘top down’ for ‘bottom up’; new game is ‘multi-level’ and finding the right incentives at all levels • Importance of long term goals and alternative accounting systems • UN processes important, but ‘baskets of approaches’ are probably more viable than ‘single treaty’ reform • Connect different levels of decision-making, but take subsidiarity serious • Strengthen role of civil society and business in international processes – Aarhus convention • Importance of new coalitions, e.g. multi-stakeholder supply chain initiatives

  30. What we want to do better (in progress) • Improved description of feedbacks (e.g. effects of unsustainable land use on production) – in progress • Further improve description of interactions • Link “top-down” with “bottom-up” • Urban vs rural (e.g. with respect to food security) • Development of production and demand of forest products 10 juni 2014

  31. Conclusions • Progress on sustainable development has been made but goals will not be reached without transformative changes; yet many pathways are possible. • A new approach for sustainable development is needed: • Multi-level / multi sector / multi sphere • Based on a more elaborated long-term vision, combined with short-term targets • Fundamental policy-areas that need to be addressed at short term to ensure progress in meeting the sustainable development goals related food, land and biodiversity: • Sustainable intensification of agriculture, • More robust food system against increasing pressures • Mainstreaming biodiversity considerations in land use planning and management • further consideration of potential adjustments in consumer habits • Need to change the “normalcy” in the system 10 juni 2014

  32. Thank youwww.pbl.nl/enmaurits.vandenberg@pbl.nl 10 juni 2014

  33. … but it will require radical, transformative change

  34. … but it will require radical, transformative change • Different routes possible (e.g. more/less consumption change) • Shift towards different system operation required • Recognize synergies and trade-offs!

More Related