Environment

FSI scholars approach their research on the environment from regulatory, economic and societal angles. The Center on Food Security and the Environment weighs the connection between climate change and agriculture; the impact of biofuel expansion on land and food supply; how to increase crop yields without expanding agricultural lands; and the trends in aquaculture. FSE’s research spans the globe – from the potential of smallholder irrigation to reduce hunger and improve development in sub-Saharan Africa to the devastation of drought on Iowa farms. David Lobell, a senior fellow at FSI and a recipient of a MacArthur “genius” grant, has looked at the impacts of increasing wheat and corn crops in Africa, South Asia, Mexico and the United States; and has studied the effects of extreme heat on the world’s staple crops.

Paragraphs

Policy-makers in the world's poorest countries are often forced to make decisions based on limited data. Consider Angola, which recently conducted its first postcolonial census. In the 44 years that elapsed between the prior census and the recent one, the country's population grew from 5.6 million to 24.3 million, and the country experienced a protracted civil war that displaced millions of citizens. In situations where reliable survey data are missing or out of date, a novel line of research offers promising alternatives. On page 790 of this issue, Jean et al.(1) apply recent advances in machine learning to high-resolution satellite imagery to accurately measure regional poverty in Africa.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Science
Authors
Paragraphs

There have been dramatic advances in understanding the physical science of climate change, facilitated by substantial and reliable research support. The social value of these advances depends on understanding their implications for society, an arena where research support has been more modest and research progress slower. Some advances have been made in understanding and formalizing climate-economy linkages, but knowledge gaps remain [e.g., as discussed in (1, 2)]. We outline three areas where we believe research progress on climate economics is both sorely needed, in light of policy relevance, and possible within the next few years given appropriate funding: (i) refining the social cost of carbon (SCC), (ii) improving understanding of the consequences of particular policies, and (iii) better understanding of the economic impacts and policy choices in developing economies.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Science
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Gaps in social science knowledge of climate change constrain the policy impact of natural science research, a Stanford team argues.


Scientists have made huge strides in understanding the physical and biological dimensions of climate change, from deciphering why climate has changed in the past to predicting how it might change in the future.

As the body of knowledge on the physical science of climate grows, a missing link is emerging: What are the economic and social consequences of changes in the climate and efforts to control emissions of greenhouse gases?

In a new paper in the journal Science, a team led by Stanford professors Charles Kolstad and Marshall Burkeargues that relatively low funding for social science research has contributed to a knowledge gap about what climate change means for human society. This knowledge gap, they argue, renders the large advances in natural science less useful than they could be for policymakers.

The paper highlights three research questions with the greatest potential to close that gap:

 

What is the true cost of carbon emissions?

The social cost of carbon (SCC) is a dollar value estimate of future social and economic damages caused by each present-day metric ton of carbon emissions. It can also be thought of as the amount of money society saves, in terms of damage avoided, by not emitting an additional metric ton of carbon.

"The SCC is a key policy measurement that's already being used in U.S. government regulations. But existing estimates have shortcomings and these need fixing if we are going to make the correct policy decisions around climate change," said Burke, an assistant professor at Stanford School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences, a center fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and a faculty fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

Current SCC calculations leave out several important factors. For example, what is the economic cost of extreme climate events such as floods and droughts? How should economists estimate "non-market" damages that are exacerbated by climate change, such as armed conflict, disease epidemics and deforestation? In what parts of the world does climate change slow or accelerate economic growth? Can farmers avoid lost income from climate change by adapting their crop choices and planting schedules?

"Getting the social cost of carbon right is most pressing, given its importance to policy," said Kolstad, a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and at the Precourt Institute for Energy. "It's also an area where rapid research progress should be possible."

 

What emissions mitigation policies are best?

Once researchers agree on the true cost of carbon, there are many policy options for reducing emissions. Industry regulations and subsidies for renewable energy are popular policy choices for governments all over the world, but they may be weaker at cutting emissions than less politically popular options like carbon pricing or tradeable carbon emission permits.

"Until we understand more about the benefits and tradeoffs of different carbon pricing options, governments are almost flying blind on climate mitigation policy," Kolstad said. "When we can make a clear economic case for one policy over the other, we can better align decisions about carbon pricing systems with their actual costs and benefits and, as a result, strengthen political support for action." 

 

What role do developing countries play?

Most of the existing research on climate economics tends to focus on wealthy countries, even though developing countries now contribute more total greenhouse gas emissions. Poorer countries also often face a different policy environment than richer countries and are potentially more economically vulnerable to changes in climate.

"We need better evidence on how impacts of climate change might differ in developing countries, as well as a deeper understanding of the climate policy choices faced by developing country governments," Burke said.


Twenty-eight leading economists contributed to the Science paper, a fact that Burke pointed to as evidence of broad consensus on the need for more economic research on climate change.

The biggest roadblock, the authors agree, is funding.

"The research problems are tough for both natural scientists and economists, but research support has been much more modest in economics, so far fewer people are working in the area and progress has been slower," Kolstad said.

"Dozens of teams of physical scientists around the world work with the exact same climate simulations and compare results to estimate future climate change," Burke said.  "Economists are just starting to do something similar, and as this collaboration develops I think it will be immensely valuable. There's a strong argument for spending research dollars on understanding the economic and social implications of that physical science. Social science is relatively cheap, so extra funding can go a long way."

Kolstad encourages young researchers to pursue the "many interesting, socially relevant questions in this field" and advises governments to work together to strengthen long-term research funding and support for graduate students and postdoctoral researchers. "Otherwise," he said, "the large sums spent on natural science will be poorly targeted."


CONTACT:

Charles Kolstad, SIEPR: ckolstad@stanford.edu, (650) 721-1663

Marshall Burke, Earth System Science: mburke@stanford.edu, (650) 721-2203

Laura Seaman, Food Security and the Environment: lseaman@stanford.edu, (650) 723-4920

Hero Image
adobestock 36756868 Adobe Stock
All News button
1
Paragraphs
In 2007, "solar market gardens" were installed in 2 villages for women’s agricultural groups as a strategy for enhancing food and nutrition security. Data were collected through interviews at installation and 1 year later from all women’s group households (30–35 women/group) and from a random representative sample of 30 households in each village, for both treatment and matched-pair comparison villages. Comparison of baseline and endline data indicated increases in the variety of fruits and vegetables produced and consumed by SMG women’s groups compared to other groups. The proportion of SMG women’s group households engaged in vegetable and fruit production significantly increased by 26% and 55%, respectively (P < .05). After controlling for baseline values, SMG women’s groups were 3 times more likely to increase their fruit and vegetable consumption compared with comparison non-women’s groups (P < .05). In addition, the percentage change in corn, sorghum, beans, oil, rice and fish purchased was significantly greater in the SMG women’s groups compared to other groups. At endline, 57% of the women used their additional income on food, 54% on health care, and 25% on education. Solar Market Gardens have the potential to improve household nutritional status through direct consumption and increased income to make economic decisions.
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Food and Nutrition Bulletin
Authors
Jennifer Burney
Rosamond L. Naylor
Paragraphs

This research brief is based on a paper from the journal Nature, published on-line on October 21, 2015, entitled “Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production.” The paper, led by Stanford University’s Marshall Burke, provides the first evidence that economic activity in all regions is coupled to the global climate and establishes a new empirical foundation for modelling economic loss in response to climate change.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Policy Briefs
Publication Date
Paragraphs

David Lobell’s recent research indicates that negative impacts to the global agriculture system are much more likely, more severe and wider-ranging in the face of human-caused climate change. Temperature increases are the main drier behind these far-reaching impacts.. There are several pathways toward adaptation, though none of them appears to completely offset the losses. Research highlighted in this brief offers insights for institutions and decisionmakers concerned with protecting food security and international stability throughout the coming decades.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Policy Briefs
Publication Date
Paragraphs

Climate change can reduce crop yields and thereby threaten food security. The current measures used to adapt to climate change involve avoiding crops yield decrease, however, the limitations of such measures due to water and other resources scarcity have not been well understood. Here, we quantify how the sensitivity of maize to water availability has increased because of the shift toward longer-maturing varieties during last three decades in the Chinese Maize Belt (CMB). We report that modern, longer-maturing varieties have extended the growing period by an average of 8 days and have significantly offset the negative impacts of climate change on yield. However, the sensitivity of maize production to water has increased: maize yield across the CMB was 5% lower with rainfed than with irrigated maize in the 1980s and was 10% lower (and even >20% lower in some areas) in the 2000s because of both warming and the increased requirement for water by the longer-maturing varieties. Of the maize area in China, 40% now fails to receive the precipitation required to attain the full yield potential. Opportunities for water saving in maize systems exist, but water scarcity in China remains a serious problem.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Scientific Reports
Authors
David Lobell
Paragraphs

In this paper we discuss the scope of the adaptation challenge facing world agriculture in the coming decades. Due to rising temperatures throughout the tropics, pressures for adaptation will be greatest in some of the poorest parts of the world where the adaptive capacity is least abundant. We discuss both autonomous (market driven) and planned adaptations, distinguishing: (a) those that can be undertaken with existing technology, (b) those that involve development of new technologies, and (c) those that involve institutional/market and policy reforms. The paper then proceeds to identify which of these adaptations are currently modeled in integrated assessment studies and related analyses at global scale. This, in turn, gives rise to recommendations about how these models should be modified in order to more effectively capture climate change adaptation in the farm and food sector. In general, we find that existing integrated assessment models are better suited to analyzing adaptation by relatively well-endowed producers operating in market-integrated, developed countries. They likely understate climate impacts on agriculture in developing countries, while overstating the potential adaptations. This is troubling, since the need for adaptation will be greatest amongst the lower income producers in the poorest tropical countries. This is also where policies and public investments are likely to have the highest payoff. We conclude with a discussion of opportunities for improving the empirical foundations of integrated assessment modeling with an emphasis on the poorest countries.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Energy Economics
Authors
Thomas Hertel
David Lobell
Paragraphs

Quantitative estimates of the impacts of climate change on economic outcomes are important for public policy. We show that the vast majority of estimates fail to account for well-established uncertainty in future temperature and rainfall changes, leading to potentially misleading projections. We reexamine seven well-cited studies and show that accounting for climate uncertainty leads to a much larger range of projected climate impacts and a greater likelihood of worst-case outcomes, an important policy parameter. Incorporating climate uncertainty into future economic impact assessments will be critical for providing the best possible information on potential impacts.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
The Review of Economics and Statistics
Authors
Marshall Burke
David Lobell
Subscribe to Environment