E Shifts in planting date that do not imply major changes in the crop calendar;
E Additional application of irrigation water to crops already under irrigation;
E Changes in crop variety to currently available varieties better adapted to the
projected climate.
Level 2 adaptation included:
E Large shifts in planting date;
E Increased fertilizer application;
E Development of new varieties;
E Installation of irrigation systems.
Yield changes for both adaptation levels were based on crop model simulations
where available, and were extended to other crops and regions using the
estimation methods described above. The adaptation estimates were developed
only for the scenarios including the direct effects of CO
as these were judged to
the most realistic. The two levels of adaptation estimates for the UKMO scenario
were also examined. With the high level of global warming projected by the
UKMO climate change scenario, neither Level 1 nor Level 2 Adaptation
mitigated climate change effects on crop yields in most countries.
Adaptation Level 1. Figure 4a shows the effects of Level 1 adaptation on
estimated changes in cereal production. These largely offset the negative climate
change induced effects in developed countries, improving their comparative
advantage in world markets. In these regions cereal production increases by
4—14% over the reference case. However, developing countries are estimated to
benefit little from adaptation (99% to 912%). Averaged global production is
altered by between 0% and 95% from the reference case. As a consequence,
world cereal prices are estimated to increase by 10—100% and the number of
people at risk from hunger by ca. 5—50% (Figure 5). This indicates that Level 1
adaptations would have relatively little influence on reducing the global effects of
climate change.
Adaptation Level 2. More extensive adaptation virtually eliminates negative
cereal yield impacts at the global level under the GISS and GFDL scenarios and
reduces impacts under the UKMO scenario by one third (Figure 4b). However,
the decrease in the comparative advantage of developing countries under these
scenarios leads to decreased areas planted to cereals in these areas. Cereal
production in developing countries still decreases by around 5%. Globally,
however, cereal prices increase by only 5—35%, and the number of people at risk
from hunger is altered by between 92% and ;20% from the reference case
(Figure 5). This suggests that Level 2 adaptations are required to mitigate the
negative effects of climate change but that these still do not eliminate them in
developing countries.
Net imports of cereals into developing countries will increase under all
scenarios. The change in cereal imports is largely determined by the size of the
assumed yield changes, the change in relative productivity in developed and
developing regions, the change in world market prices and changes in incomes of
developing countries. Under the GISS climate scenario productivity is depressed
M. Parry and M. Livermore
120
E Additional application of irrigation water to crops already under irrigation;
E Changes in crop variety to currently available varieties better adapted to the
projected climate.
Level 2 adaptation included:
E Large shifts in planting date;
E Increased fertilizer application;
E Development of new varieties;
E Installation of irrigation systems.
Yield changes for both adaptation levels were based on crop model simulations
where available, and were extended to other crops and regions using the
estimation methods described above. The adaptation estimates were developed
only for the scenarios including the direct effects of CO
as these were judged to
the most realistic. The two levels of adaptation estimates for the UKMO scenario
were also examined. With the high level of global warming projected by the
UKMO climate change scenario, neither Level 1 nor Level 2 Adaptation
mitigated climate change effects on crop yields in most countries.
Adaptation Level 1. Figure 4a shows the effects of Level 1 adaptation on
estimated changes in cereal production. These largely offset the negative climate
change induced effects in developed countries, improving their comparative
advantage in world markets. In these regions cereal production increases by
4—14% over the reference case. However, developing countries are estimated to
benefit little from adaptation (99% to 912%). Averaged global production is
altered by between 0% and 95% from the reference case. As a consequence,
world cereal prices are estimated to increase by 10—100% and the number of
people at risk from hunger by ca. 5—50% (Figure 5). This indicates that Level 1
adaptations would have relatively little influence on reducing the global effects of
climate change.
Adaptation Level 2. More extensive adaptation virtually eliminates negative
cereal yield impacts at the global level under the GISS and GFDL scenarios and
reduces impacts under the UKMO scenario by one third (Figure 4b). However,
the decrease in the comparative advantage of developing countries under these
scenarios leads to decreased areas planted to cereals in these areas. Cereal
production in developing countries still decreases by around 5%. Globally,
however, cereal prices increase by only 5—35%, and the number of people at risk
from hunger is altered by between 92% and ;20% from the reference case
(Figure 5). This suggests that Level 2 adaptations are required to mitigate the
negative effects of climate change but that these still do not eliminate them in
developing countries.
Net imports of cereals into developing countries will increase under all
scenarios. The change in cereal imports is largely determined by the size of the
assumed yield changes, the change in relative productivity in developed and
developing regions, the change in world market prices and changes in incomes of
developing countries. Under the GISS climate scenario productivity is depressed
M. Parry and M. Livermore
120