Prospects and Policies for Global Food Security

Clemens Breisinger

Country Program Leader, Egypt

Senior Research Fellow

IFPRI

BioVisionAlexandria 2016, 12–14 April 2016

Food Security towards 2050Socioeconomic drivers, climate change,

and global and regional impacts to 2050

Based on a presentation by Keith WiebeSenior Research Fellow

IFPRI

• IMPACT – an integrated modeling system to assess agricultural and food security scenarios

• Collaboration with all 15 CGIAR centers through GFSF

• Collaboration with other global economic modeling groups through AgMIP

Foresight Modeling

Socioeconomic drivers Projected pathways to 2100

Source: Downloaded from the RCP Database version 2.0.5 (2015). RCP 2.6: van Vuuren et al. 2006; van Vuuren et al. 2007. RCP 4.5: Clark et al. 2007; Smith and Wigley 2006; Wise et al 2009. RCP 6.0: Fujino et al 2006; Hijioka et al 2008. RCP 8.5: Riahi and Nakicenovic, 2007.

Changes in diets (SSP2, NoCC)Projected pathways to 2050

Source: IFPRI, IMPACT version 3.2, November 2015

WLD = World; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EUR = Europe; FSU = Former Soviet Union; LAC = Latin America and Caribbean; MEN = Middle East and North Africa; NAM = North America; SAS = South Asia; SSA = Sub-Saharan Africa

Total global food demand (SSP2, NoCC)Projected pathways to 2050

20

10

= 1

.0

Source: IFPRI, IMPACT version 3.2, September 2015

Growth in global cereal production (SSP2, NoCC)Projected pathways to 2050

Source: IFPRI, IMPACT version 3.2, November 2015

Modeling climate impacts on agriculture:biophysical and economic effects

General circulation models (GCMs)

Global gridded crop models

(GGCMs)

Global economic models

Δ TempΔ Precip

…

Δ Yield(biophys)

Δ AreaΔ YieldΔ Cons.Δ Trade

Climate Biophysical Economic

Source: Nelson et al., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2014)

Climate change impacts on cereal yields differ by region and crop (SSP2)

Source: IFPRI, IMPACT version 3.2, November 2015

WLD = World; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EUR = Europe; FSU = Former Soviet Union; LAC = Latin America and Caribbean; MEN = Middle East and North Africa; NAM = North America; SAS = South Asia; SSA = Sub-Saharan Africa

Maize

Wheat

Cereals

Net cereal trade and climate change(SSP2)

Source: IFPRI, IMPACT version 3.2, November 2015

EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EUR = Europe; FSU = Former Soviet Union; LAC = Latin America and Caribbean; MEN = Middle East and North Africa; NAM = North America; SAS = South Asia; SSA = Sub-Saharan Africa

Population at risk of hunger (SSP2, RCP8.5)

Source: IFPRI, IMPACT version 3.2, November 2015

EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EUR = Europe; FSU = Former Soviet Union; LAC = Latin America and Caribbean; MEN = Middle East and North Africa; NAM = North America; SAS = South Asia; SSA = Sub-Saharan Africa

Improved technologies and practices can help mitigating negative effects of CC

-40.0

-35.0

-30.0

-25.0

-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

Malnourished Children Pop. at-risk-of-hunger

No till Drought tolerance Heat tolerance

Nitrogen use efficiency Integrated soil fertility mgt Precision agriculture

Water harvesting Sprinkler irrigation Drip irrigation

Crop Protection - insects

Source: Rosegrant et al. (2014)

Food security(Percent difference from 2050 CC baseline)

Source: Islam et al. (draft)

Crop yields(Percent difference from 2050 CC baseline)

Take away messages

• Significant differences across regions, crops, scenarios

• Economic responses reduce biophysical impacts, but they depend critically on policy and market conditions – and decisions

• Significant challenges for decision makers at all levels

Three Examples for Evidence-Based Support For Reforming Food Systems at

Global, MENA Regional and Country-Level

IFPRI Global Food Policy Report 2016

IFPRI – USAID collaboration

Thank you

Please contact us for further information at

www.egyptssp.ifpri.info

and

ifpri-egypt@cgiar.org