Land and biodiversity policies/Land-use regulation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
|Header=Changing consumption | |Header=Changing consumption | ||
|Description=Interventions that induce shifts in consumption, for example, towards less meat-intensive diets, directly reduce the demand for animal products (figure B on the right). As a first order effect, this intervention reduces all downstream effects of production proportionally. In other words, less demand for animal products and thus less demand for feed crop production, which requires less land and water and fewer nutrients – if all other settings in the crop production system remain the same – and thus decrease the impacts on biodiversity and climate (figures B and C on the right). However, as production systems are heterogeneous across and within regions, the effects may not be proportional. If, for example, extensively farmed agricultural areas, which typically have lower yields than other agricultural lands, are abandoned first, the reduction in area will be larger. Likewise, if production would shift to regions with lower yields, less area reduction can be achieved. In addition to this heterogeneity effect, feedbacks in the economic system via price and trade may change the final impact of a demand intervention, compared to the first-order effect, especially if such interventions are only applied in certain regions. Lower demand for meat may reduce world market prices, and thus increase the demand in other regions ([[Stehfest et al., 2013]]). Although this rebound effect would reduce the environmental benefits of the intervention, the impact on human health could still be positive. | |Description=Interventions that induce shifts in consumption, for example, towards less meat-intensive diets, directly reduce the demand for animal products (figure B on the right). As a first order effect, this intervention reduces all downstream effects of production proportionally. In other words, less demand for animal products and thus less demand for feed crop production, which requires less land and water and fewer nutrients – if all other settings in the crop production system remain the same – and thus decrease the impacts on biodiversity and climate (figures B and C on the right). However, as production systems are heterogeneous across and within regions, the effects may not be proportional. If, for example, extensively farmed agricultural areas, which typically have lower yields than other agricultural lands, are abandoned first, the reduction in area will be larger. Likewise, if production would shift to regions with lower yields, less area reduction can be achieved. In addition to this heterogeneity effect, feedbacks in the economic system via price and trade may change the final impact of a demand intervention, compared to the first-order effect, especially if such interventions are only applied in certain regions. Lower demand for meat may reduce world market prices, and thus increase the demand in other regions ([[Stehfest et al., 2013]]). Although this rebound effect would reduce the environmental benefits of the intervention, the impact on human health could still be positive. | ||
|PISet=Consumption and diet preferences; | |PISet=Consumption and diet preferences; | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate | {{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate | ||
|Header=Reducing food losses | |Header=Reducing food losses | ||
|Description=Policies aimed at reducing food losses directly decrease the demand for food, in the case of waste on a consumer level, or, if post-harvest losses are reduced, decrease the amount of produce needed to fulfil the demand. This reduces the need for the production of food crops, fodder crops and animal products and therefore also reduces the environmental impacts of the production systems and the amount of agricultural land used. However, the same dynamics and second-order effects could be expected as those described under 'shifts in consumption'. | |Description=Policies aimed at reducing food losses directly decrease the demand for food, in the case of waste on a consumer level, or, if post-harvest losses are reduced, decrease the amount of produce needed to fulfil the demand. This reduces the need for the production of food crops, fodder crops and animal products and therefore also reduces the environmental impacts of the production systems and the amount of agricultural land used. However, the same dynamics and second-order effects could be expected as those described under 'shifts in consumption'. | ||
|PISet=Carbon tax; | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate | {{ZZ PolicyInterventionSetTemplate | ||