Climate Change and Agriculture: The Policy Challenge for the 21st Century?

` ` Changement climatique et agriculture : le defi du 21eme siecle pour laction publique? Klimawandel und Landwirtschaft: Die politische Herausforderung fur das 21. Jahrhundert? Hsin Huang, Wilfrid Legg and Andrea Cattaneo
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in 2004 agriculture directly contributed 13.5 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). In addition deforestation, mainly to convert land to agricultural uses, contributed a further 17 per cent. Taken together, agriculture contributes about onethird of global GHG emissions (Figure 1). However this share varies signicantly by country. It is also generally higher in developing countries, where agriculture is a higher proportion of the economy than in developed countries. Devising policies and undertaking commitments to reduce GHG emissions from agriculture clearly entails knowing more about agricultures carbon footprint. Like most other sectors this carbon footprint is increasing, since farming is set to expand to produce more food for a growing world population. OECD projections suggest that by 2030 global agriculture will need to increase output by more than 50 per cent in order to feed a population 40 per cent larger and roughly 60 per cent wealthier than at present. Looking further ahead, food production will need to double from current levels to feed more than 9 billion people in 2050 (Bruinsma, 2009). That means more land-use change, more cultivation of crops, many more livestock, more demands for water and more use of fossil fuels. And that has to be seen in the light of more competition for the land for bioenergy production as well as for urban and environmental uses. There are, however, other challenges but also opportunities facing agriculture. As well as being a source of GHGs contributing to climate change, agriculture is itself affected by shifts in climate. Projections to 2050 suggest an increase in both global mean temperatures and weather variability, including precipitation (IPCC, 2007). This will clearly affect the type and location of agricultural production worldwide, with implications for trade and for livelihoods. Many countries will be able to adapt and some may even benet by being able to grow new crops. Poorer communities and those living in fragile lands, such as deltas, low-lying coasts and islands, may be exposed to greater risks, especially those in developing countries because of lack of assets along with inadequate insurance coverage. Some wealthier countries will also have agricultural activities affected by droughts and oods associated with climate change. There will also be opportunities for agriculture and indeed the agri-food supply chain. Agriculture is one of the few sectors that can contribute to both mitigation and to sequestration of carbon emissions in agricultural soils. Thus, in addition to reducing its own emissions, carbon sequestration in agricultural soils can play an important role in off-setting emissions from other sectors. Moreover, should the long-run declining trend in real prices for agricultural commodities be reversed, the terms of trade may

Figure 1: Global GHG emissions by sector, in CO2 equivalents

Source: IPCC AR4 Synthesis Report: Summary for Policy Makers (www.ipcc.ch/publications and data/ar4/syr/en/spms2.html).

2010 The Authors EuroChoices 9(3) 09 EuroChoices 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists

move in favour of agricultural production. In such a scenario the justication for production support policies is weakened, yet the incentive to invest in productivityenhancing research and development is strengthened. Productivity increases (more output per unit of energy input) can also make important contributions to GHG mitigation goals. These impacts highlight a number of issues for policymakers to address. The overall challenge is to position the agriculture and agri-food sectors to meet ongoing or expected global climate change, food security and trade commitments, while ensuring that the environment and supplies of natural resources are not unduly compromised. This reinforces the importance of global co-operation in climate change and trade negotiations, as trade and investment have key roles to play in meeting adaptation needs in the years ahead. International trade plays a crucial role in counterbalancing, albeit partially, the impact of regional changes in productivity induced by climate change. But equally important it highlights the need to devise, design and implement policies that can best achieve these often conicting goals at least cost. Although agriculture is not currently subject to emissions caps, several OECD countries are already implementing mitigation action plans.

Les prochaines reformes de la politique pourraient mieux cibler des resultats environne mentaux speciques, par exemple en encourageant des techniques de production qui minimisent ` les emissions de gaz a effet de serre.

,,

Depending on the actual outcome for future climate change, the expected impacts on agriculture in temperate zones which include OECD countries and assuming no measures are taken to adapt, are summarised in Table 1.

to achieve (per ton of GHG abated) than many available in industrial and transport sectors. With the right technologies and systems, improved cropland and grazing land management, restoration of degraded lands, and land use change such as agro-forestry, agriculture can make a major contribution to limiting greenhouse gases. Emissions from livestock production can be reduced by improving nutrition and manure management. The mitigation opportunities in the agricultural sector are economically viable for immediate action, which is not yet the case for some of the other promising mitigation options such as decarbonising energy production (solar, wind) and carbon capture and storage technology. Science offers promising solutions in areas such as genetics, so-called second-generation biofuels (that compete less with land used for food and feed crops), and carbon sequestration, though clearly more research is needed. Genetics, for instance, could help reduce methane from animal respiration and digestion. In certain conditions, a sizeable share of methane from cattle and sheep (methane is many times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas) can be offset by capturing the carbon in pastureland. There are challenges, though related to knowledge gaps and uncertainties. The rst challenge is essentially one of precision in measurement. However, the atomistic nature of production (many individual farmers) in a wide range of geographic and climatic conditions means that emissions are not only highly variable but also difcult and therefore costly to measure with precision. Second, understanding the link between mitigation actions and emissions reductions is by no means straightforward. There continues to be a great deal of uncertainty in the science as GHG emissions from agricultural activities are subject to a complex interplay of many factors such as climate, soil type, slope, and production practices. In contrast, estimating GHG emissions from a particular coal plant or vehicle is relatively straightforward. Third,

The role of agriculture in combating climate change

How can agriculture contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions? One answer is carbon sequestration, as soil literally captures and absorbs carbon and so offsets emissions not only from farming, but from other sectors too. Another option is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural activities. Some of these mitigation options may be less costly

Table 1: Impacts of climate change on OECD agriculture Temp. Change +1 to +2 Impact Some increase in yield Cold limitation alleviated Yield reduction in some latitudes (without adaptation) Seasonal increase in heat-stress for livestock Potential increase in yield due to CO2 fertilisation (but likely offset by other factors) Moderate production losses of pigs and conned cattle Increased heat stress Yields of all crops fall in low latitudes (without adaptation) Maize and wheat yields fall regardless of adaptation in low latitudes High production losses of pigs and conned cattle Increased heat stress and mortality in livestock

+2 to +3

+3 to +5

Source: Adapted from IPCC Working Group II Report, Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability.

10 EuroChoices 9(3) EuroChoices

2010 The Authors 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists

looking towards the future, it is difcult to trace the timing and severity of climate change impacts on agriculture; and to factor in the impacts of changing technologies and farm practices to adapt to climate change and mitigate GHG emissions. Another uncertainty is linked to the permanence of carbon sequestration in agriculture and the possibility of reversals. The potential for re-emission into the atmosphere of carbon sequestered by agriculture may stem from natural events, such as re and oods, or from anthropogenic (human-origin) risks linked to a return to emitting farming practices. Calculating indirect land-use changes arising from agricultural production is another challenge. The global surges in food prices in recent years partly reected competition for land use related to world food and energy markets. In particular, the links between the production of biofuels from feedstocks these are subsidised in many countries consequent landuse changes, including deforestation, and effects on food prices are not always clear and are also contested. Several issues need to be further explored. Do rst generation biofuels (from feedstock) result in net GHG savings if land use changes are fully accounted for? (Searchinger et al., 2008). Given concerns about future food security, what is the potential contribution of second generation biofuels made from waste, and nonfood cellulosic materials? What is the impact on other criteria related to environmental sustainability such as fragile lands and biodiversity? (Zahniser, 2010).
A subsistence farmer examines his destroyed banana crop from oods. FAO/Clive Shirley 2000

on future global warming, some adaptation will have to occur. Producers adaptation may range from altering farm management practices to adoption of new varieties crops animal breeds more appropriate to future climate conditions (Mendelsohn and Dinar, 2009).

As agricultural production increases, resource constraints, particularly water, will become tighter. Agriculture accounts for about 70 per cent of the worlds freshwater withdrawals. Production risk in the face of these changes will require both rain-fed and irrigated agriculture to be more sustainably managed.

Adaptation
While some regions of the world may benet from improved agricultural conditions, the overall effect of climate change is nonetheless expected to be negative for global agricultural production if no action is taken. Increased concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere already lockin a certain amount of climate change. Moreover, given the long time lags that will be required for GHG mitigation efforts to have an impact

Die Politikreformen der Zukunft konnten sich besser auf konkrete Umweltfolgen konzentrieren wie z.B. auf die Forderung von Produktionsverfahren, welche die Treibhausgasemissionen so gering wie moglich halten.

,,

Policy options
The Copenhagen Accord (December 2009) recognises the scientic view (IPCC) that future global warming must be limited to a 2 degree Celsius temperature increase.1 If the goal is to be met, IPCC has calculated that human generated GHG emissions will have to decrease globally some 50 per cent by 2050 from 1990 levels.2 However, the Copenhagen Accord is not legally binding, as it is based on voluntary emissions targets announced by the signatories (see Box). Despite its relatively high contribution to global GHG emissions, agriculture does not contribute substantially3 to meeting emissions caps under the Kyoto agreement. One of the principal failures of the Copenhagen process was the lack of progress in dening how to fully integrate agriculture (i.e. to include its sequestration potential) into a future agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012.

Climate change is expected to alter the seasonal timing of rainfall and snow pack melt and result in a higher incidence and severity of oods and droughts. Some regions may well benet from these changes, but it is expected that some of the already poorest regions, including much of Africa, will be particularly vulnerable because they lack the resources to adapt.

2010 The Authors EuroChoices 9(3) 11 EuroChoices 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists

Copenhagen Accord pledged targets and actions (as of June 2010)

At the fteenth session of the Conference of Parties (COP-15) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Copenhagen in December 2009, the assembled international community took note of the Copenhagen Accord, a political agreement on climate change. To date, more than 120 countries plus the European Union have associated themselves with the Accord ranging from major emitters such as the United States and China, to smaller countries that are vulnerable to climate change impacts, such as the Maldives. The Accord invited all Parties to the UNFCCC to submit pledges for targets or actions to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These quantied economy-wide emissions targets for Annex I countries and mitigation actions by non-Annex I countries for 2020 are summarised below. These targets and baselines range widely, including 20 per cent in the EU, 25 per cent in Japan, 525 per cent in Australia, and 17 per cent in the US. Overall, the pledges amount to cuts in global CO2 of 1119 per cent by 2020.
Region Australia & New Zealand Canada EU-27 & EFTA Japan Russia United States Non-EU Eastern Europe Brazil China India Oil exporting countries & Middle East2 Rest of the World Declared country targets and actions Australia 5% to 25% from 2000; New Zealand 10% to 20% from 1990 17% from 2005 domestic reductions; max. 10% credits from Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) EU-27, Liechtenstein and Switzerland 20% to 30% from 1990; Norway 30% to 40% from 1990; Iceland 30% from 1990; Monaco 30% from 1990 25% from 1990 15% to 25% from 1990 17% from 2005 Ukraine 20% from 1990; Belarus 5% to 10% from 1990; Croatia 5% from 1990 36% to 39% from business as usual (BAU) Carbon intensity (CO2 emissions per unit GDP) 40% to 45% from 2005 Carbon intensity 20% to 25% from 2005 Indonesia 26% from BAU; Israel 20% from BAU Korea 30% from BAU; Mexico 30% from BAU; South Africa 34% from BAU; many other pledges (incl. Costa Rica, Maldives, Marshall Islands)

Notes: 1All emission reductions are excluding Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF). The 20 per cent limit on offsets in most Annex I regions is in line with the assumption in OECD (2009). All emissions are based on International Energy Agency and US-Environmental Protection Agency data. 2 The region includes the Middle East, Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Indonesia and Venezuela. Source: Dellink et al. (2010).

To meet projected future growth in demand, agricultural productivity will have to improve to achieve substantial increases in food production. There are nite limits to sustainable use of land, water and other resources, although their impacts can be offset to some extent by technological change and better farm management practices. Equally important, agriculture and food production are carbon based and therefore by denition emissions can never be reduced to zero as in other sectors such as energy. Thanks largely to increases in productivity, OECD total emissions from agricultural sources have declined by 3 per cent from the Kyoto Protocol reference period of 199092 to 200204 (OECD, 2008). In contrast, non-Annex I countries (for the most part developing countries) which, according to IPCC were responsible for three-quarters of global
12 EuroChoices 9(3) EuroChoices

agricultural emissions in 2005, have had emissions growth of 32 per cent since 1990. These countries also have the least efcient production systems. Thus there is tremendous potential (and therefore opportunity) in technology transfer from developed to developing countries. At the same time the challenges to be overcome should not be underestimated, particularly those related to general infrastructure development and chronic underfunding of basic research in agriculture that would be necessary to adapt newer technologies to local conditions. All OECD countries have policies in place that are intended to limit the harmful environmental effects of agriculture, either applied to all economic sectors or agriculturespecic sectors. Many of these, such as reducing nutrient run-off from

wasteful fertiliser applications or manure surpluses (to improve water quality), will also have the effect of reducing GHGs. Others, such as no or low till agriculture are aimed at reducing erosion, and also have the effect of conserving organic carbon in soils. However policies directed specically towards reduction of GHGs in agriculture are only now in the process of being developed.4 In particular, many countries have begun to implement climate change action plans that in the main supply information to farmers on specic climate-friendly policies (e.g. Australia), or suggest practices for adaptation to climate change (e.g. United Kingdom). Other countries have focused effort on agricultural insurance (e.g. United States, Spain and Italy), which aim to provide a cushion to farmers in the event of extreme weather events. However,

2010 The Authors 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists

insurance measures may hinder adaptation by locking farmers into existing production patterns and practices. There is a broad trend in policy thinking if not concrete actions in moving towards technical solutions focused on investments and management practices that help farmers adapt to the effects of climate change and reduce GHG emissions. While there is much talk and analysis of developing a carbon market and pricing carbon that would allow farmers and others to make decisions on reducing GHG emissions or storing carbon, this has not yet materialised in practice. There is an urgent need to consider whether an international agreement would be the channel to enable appropriate national policy actions to be taken in the context of a global framework to reduce emissions from agriculture in the most efcient and least-cost manner. For agriculture to realise its mitigation potential it will be necessary that farmers understand the risks involved and how uncertainty may affect their return from climate change mitigation activities. From a measurement perspective, the IPCC typically adopts a tiered accounting system, which provides conservative estimates of emissions reductions. In terms of addressing uncertainty due to reversals several options have been identied. For example, credits could be generated when carbon is stored and debits generated when it is released. Alternatively, a simpler approach is that a given percentage of credits is set aside in a buffer pool and held to cover reversals (Murray et al., 2007), as is currently recommended under the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) and under the Voluntary Carbon Standards protocol for Agriculture, Forestry, and Land Use (AFOLU) projects. Agriculture is a sector in which governments have always intervened signicantly, not only in terms of domestic support or trade barriers, but also though regulatory measures. At present, according to the OECD, the support provided to OECD agriculture as measured by the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) was

US$ 252 billion (182 billion) in 2009, or 22 per cent of farmer receipts; but varying widely from under 5 per cent in Australia and New Zealand to 9 per cent in the United States, 23 per cent in the European Union, to 47 per cent in Japan, 58 per cent in Switzerland and 61 per cent in Norway. In addition, support provided to the agricultural sector as a whole through general services such as R&D, education, infrastructure, marketing and promotion, accounted in 2009 for a much smaller (US$ 95 billion or 68 billion) but growing amount (OECD, 2010).

to move further in this direction, decoupling more support from production and targeting specic environmental and climate changerelated practices or outcomes. In addition, in many countries farmers are under charged for the water they use and have little incentive to conserve it, yet this is a resource that is becoming even scarcer in the context of climate change.

Policy reforms and climate change

Government policy can play an important role in maintaining a viable agriculture in the face of climate change. Recent reforms of agricultural policies in OECD countries, in particular the shift to decoupling, have reduced specic commodity related production distortions. Future reforms might better target specic environmental outcomes, such as encouraging production techniques that minimise GHG emissions. Mitigation and adaptation approaches will need to be strengthened. These approaches are likely to be more effective if they are embedded in longer-term strategies closely linked to agricultural policy reform, risk management policy, research and development (technical options) and market approaches. Examples include: rethinking crop and disaster insurance; research in crop varieties

Future policy reforms might better target specic environmental outcomes, such as encouraging production techniques that minimise GHG emissions.

Some of this support is directed at improving environmental performance, which can also have the effect of reducing GHGs and helping farmers adapt to climate change. There is probably a lot more potential

Effects of drought in Kenya. FAO/Ami Vitale 2005

2010 The Authors EuroChoices 9(3) 13 EuroChoices 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists

,,

and breeds better adapted to changing climatic conditions; and more efcient use of water. Finally, in addition to the benets for climate change, it should be noted that better farming methods can provide important co-benets in the areas of water quality, biodiversity, soil quality as well as other environmental goals. In responding to the future challenges for agriculture of addressing climate change and meeting growing food demand, it is important to develop a coherent policy approach that: ensures a stable policy environment that sends clear signals to consumers and producers about the costs and benets of GHG mitigating sequestering activities; implements policies that provide a real or implicit price of carbon to create incentives for producers and consumers to invest in low-GHG

products, technologies and processes; designs policies that foster the application of existing technologies and invest in research and development for new technologies to reduce GHG emissions and increase productivity; builds capacity to better understand and measure the GHG impact of agricultural activities essential for monitoring progress relative to national and international climate change goals; implements or enhances existing policies that facilitate adaptation by increasing producer resilience to climate change, and that compensate the most vulnerable groups, in particular in developing countries; and encourages more research on understanding and linking agronomy, ecology and economics, in particular taking into account

risks and uncertainties, and the potential for agriculture to adapt.

Notes
1. There was however a wide diversity of views amongst countries on the temperature to target some countries questioned the need for any target at all. 2. IPCC has calculated several scenarios or storylines which differ depending on assumptions, notably for future economic growth, technological development, and whether or not negative emissions are possible after 2050. 3. Agriculture is only considered as a source of emissions, whilst options for sequestration are limited and voluntary. 4. Currently, New Zealand is the only OECD country announcing specic plans to include agriculture in an emissions trading scheme (by 2015), and it is by no means clear that it will be implemented.

Further Reading
n Bruinsma, J. (2009). The Resource Outlook for 2050 By how much do land, water use and crop yields need to increase by 2050? Paper to the FAO Expert Meeting on How to Feed the World in 2050, Rome, FAO, 2224 June. n n n n n n n n n n
de Haen, H. (2008). Food security strategies: building resilience against natural disasters. EuroChoices, 7(3): 2633. Dellink, R., Briner, G. and Clapp, C. (2010). Costs, Revenues and Effectiveness of the Copenhagen Accord Emission Pledges for 2020. OECD Environment Working Paper no. 22, Paris, OECD.

IPCC (2007). Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson (eds.), Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, 976pp. Mendelsohn, R. and Dinar, A. (2009). Climate Change and Agriculture: an Economic Analysis of Global Impacts, Adaptation and Distributional Effects. Northampton, Edward Elgar. Murray, B.C., Sohngen, B.L. and Ross, M.T. (2007). Economic consequences of consideration of permanence, leakage and additionality for soil carbon sequestration projects. Climatic Change, 80: 127143. OECD (2008). Environmental Performance of Agriculture in OECD Countries Since 1990, Paris, OECD. OECD (2009). The Economics of Climate Change Mitigation: Policies and Options for Global Action Beyond 2012, Paris, OECD. OECD (2010). Agricultural Policies in OECD Countries: At a Glance, Paris, OECD.

Searchinger, T., Heimlich, R., Houghton, R. A., Dong, F. X., Elobeid, A., Fabiosa, J., Tokgoz, S., Hayes, D. and Yu, T. H. (2008). Use of US croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science, 319: 1238 1240. Voluntary Carbon Standard Association (2008). Voluntary Carbon Standard: Guidance for Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use Projects, VCS 2007.1, 2008, VCS Association.

n Wreford, A., Moran, D. and Adger, N. (2010). Climate Change and Agriculture: Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation. OECD Consultant Report, Paris, OECD. n Zahniser, S. (2010). EU Environmental Sustainability Requirements and Brazilian Biofuel Exports. EuroChoices, 9(2): 28 34.

Hsin Huang is with the OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate; Wilfrid Legg is Head of the Agricultural Policies and Environment Division at the OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate; and Andrea Cattaneo is also with the OECD Trade and Agriculture Directorate, Paris. Email: hsin.huang@oecd.org, wilfrid.legg@oecd.org; andrea.cattaneo@oecd.org.

14 EuroChoices 9(3) EuroChoices

2010 The Authors 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists

summary
Climate Change and Agriculture: The Policy Challenge for the 21st Century? Changement climatique et agriculture : le de du ` ` 21eme siecle pour laction publique? Klimawandel und Landwirtschaft: Die politische Herausforderung fur das 21. Jahrhundert?
Der Klimawandel wird sich erheblich auf die Landwirtschaft auswirken. Die Landwirte sowie die Wertschpfungskette der Agrar- und Ernhrungswirtschaft werden sich anpassen und gleichzeitig die Ernhrung fr eine wachsende Bevlkerung sicherstellen mssen. Wir knnen von der Landwirtschaft einen Zielbeitrag zur Senkung von Treibhausgasemissionen erwarten, obwohl dieser Sektor bei der UNKlimakonferenz im Dezember 2009 in Kopenhagen keine besonders groe Rolle gespielt hat. Der gegenwrtige oder erwartete globale Klimawandel, Nahrungsmittelsicherheit und Handelsverpichtungen stellen sowohl Herausforderungen als auch Chancen fr die Agrar- und Ernhrungswirtschaft dar, da die Landwirtschaft einer der wenigen Bereiche ist, der sowohl die Senkung als auch die Sequestrierung von CO2-Emissionen begnstigt. Es ist unbedingt erforderlich, den CO2Fuabdruck fr die Landwirtschaft zu bestimmen, falls diese in die Zielvorgaben zur Senkung von Treibhausgasemissionen mit einbezogen werden soll. Die Spannweite und Variabilitt der Schtzungen sowie die Komplexitt und Unsicherheit bei der Bestimmung von indirekten Landnutzungsnderungen sind jedoch noch problematisch. Politikmanahmen werden die Anpassungsfhigkeit der Landwirtschaft an den Klimawandel, die Senkung von Treibhausgasemissionen, untersttzen und zugleich einen Beitrag zu anderen Umweltzielen leisten. Wir mssen dringend berprfen, ob ein internationales Abkommen geeignet erscheint, nationale politische Handlungen im Rahmen eines globalen Systems angemessen umzusetzen, um landwirtschaftsbedingte Emissionen am efzientesten und kostengnstigsten zu senken. Climate change will have signicant impacts on agriculture. Farmers and the agri-food supply chain will have to adapt, while at the same time providing food for a growing population. Agriculture can be expected to contribute to meeting targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, although the sector did not gure signicantly at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December 2009. The ongoing or expected international climate change, food security and trade commitments present both challenges and opportunities for the agri-food sector, as agriculture is one of the few sectors that can contribute to both mitigation and sequestration of carbon emissions. Accounting for agricultures carbon footprint is a key issue given the possibility of including agriculture in greenhouse gas reduction commitments. However, the range and variability of estimates, and the complexity and uncertainty of accounting for indirect land use change remain to be resolved. Policies will play a role in enhancing the ability of agriculture to adapt to climate change, in reducing greenhouse gases, while contributing to other environmental goals. There is an urgent need to consider whether an international agreement would be the channel to enable appropriate national policy actions to be taken in the context of a global framework to reduce emissions from agriculture in the most efcient and least-cost manner. Le changement climatique aura des incidences importantes sur lagriculture. Les agriculteurs et la lire alimentaire devront sadapter tout en fournissant de la nourriture une population croissante. On sattend ce que lagriculture puisse contribuer aux objectifs de rduction des missions de gaz effet de serre, mme si le secteur na pas beaucoup t voqu lors de la Confrence des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques de Copenhague en dcembre 2009. Les engagements internationaux prsents ou venir concernant le changement climatique, la scurit alimentaire et le commerce, prsentent la fois des ds et des opportunits pour le secteur agro-alimentaire dans son ensemble, car lagriculture est lun des quelques secteurs susceptibles de contribuer la fois la rduction et la squestration des missions de carbone. Il est essentiel de prendre en compte lempreinte carbone de lagriculture car il est possible dinclure le secteur dans les engagements de rduction des gaz effet de serre. Il reste cependant des questions rsoudre compte tenu de la gamme et la variabilit des estimations, ainsi que la complexit et les incertitudes entourant la prise en compte des modications indirectes de lutilisation des terres. Les politiques vont jouer un rle dans lamlioration de la capacit de lagriculture sadapter au changement climatique et dans la rduction des gaz effet de serre, tout en contribuant aux autres objectifs agroenvironnementaux. Il est urgent de se demander si un accord international permettrait la mise en place dactions publiques nationales appropries dans le cadre mondial de rduction des missions provenant de lagriculture de la manire la plus efciente et la moins coteuse.

summary

2010 The Authors EuroChoices 9(3) 15 EuroChoices 2010 The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists