Economics at your fingertips  

Avoided economic impacts of climate change on agriculture: integrating a land surface model (CLM) with a global economic model (iPETS)

Xiaolin Ren (), Matthias Weitzel (), Brian C. O’Neill, Peter Lawrence, Prasanth Meiyappan, Samuel Levis, Edward Balistreri () and Michael Dalton
Additional contact information
Xiaolin Ren: National Center for Atmospheric Research
Brian C. O’Neill: National Center for Atmospheric Research
Peter Lawrence: National Center for Atmospheric Research
Prasanth Meiyappan: University of Illinois
Samuel Levis: The Climate Corporation
Michael Dalton: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

Climatic Change, 2018, vol. 146, issue 3, No 17, 517-531

Abstract: Abstract Crop yields are vulnerable to climate change. We assess the global impacts of climate change on agricultural systems under two climate projections (RCP8.5 and RCP4.5) to quantify the difference in impacts if climate change were reduced. We also employ two different socioeconomic pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) to assess the sensitivity of results to the underlying socioeconomic conditions. The integrated-Population-Economy-Technology-Science (iPETS) model, a global integrated assessment model for projecting future energy use, land use and emissions, is used in conjunction with the Community Earth System Model (CESM), and particularly its land surface component, the Community Land Model (CLM), to evaluate climate change impacts on agriculture. iPETS results are produced at the level of nine world regions for the period 2005–2100. We employ climate impacts on crop yield derived from CLM, driven by CESM simulations of the two RCPs. These yield effects are applied within iPETS, imposed on baseline and mitigation scenarios for SSP3 and SSP5 that are consistent with the RCPs. We find that the reduced level of warming in RCP4.5 (relative to RCP8.5) can have either positive or negative effects on the economy since crop yield either increases or decreases with climate change depending on assumptions about CO2 fertilization. Yields are up to 12 % lower, and crop prices are up to 15 % higher, in RCP4.5 relative to RCP8.5 if CO2 fertilization is included, whereas yields are up to 22 % higher, and crop prices up to 22 % lower, if it is not. We also find that in the mitigation scenarios (RCP4.5), crop prices are substantially affected by mitigation actions as well as by climate impacts. For the scenarios we evaluated, the development pathway (SSP3 vs SSP5) has a larger impact on outcomes than climate (RCP4.5 vs RCP8.5), by a factor of 3 for crop prices, 11 for total cropland use, and 35 for GDP on global average.

Keywords: Avoided impacts; Climate change; Crop yields; CO2 fertilization; Integrated assessment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11) Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link) Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
Working Paper: Avoided economic impacts of climate change on agriculture: Integrating a land surface model (CLM) with a global economic model (iPETS) (2015) Downloads
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link:

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from

DOI: 10.1007/s10584-016-1791-1

Access Statistics for this article

Climatic Change is currently edited by M. Oppenheimer and G. Yohe

More articles in Climatic Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().

Page updated 2022-01-05
Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:146:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-016-1791-1