Mitigation scenarios that achieve the ambitious targets included in the Paris Agreement typically rely on greenhouse gas emission reductions combined with net carbon dioxide removal (CDR) from the atmosphere, mostly accomplished through large-scale application of bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, and afforestation. However, CDR strategies face several difficulties such as reliance on underground CO 2 storage and competition for land with food production and biodiversity protection. The question arises whether alternative deep mitigation pathways exist. Here, using an integrated assessment model, we explore the impact of alternative pathways that include lifestyle change, additional reduction of non-CO 2 greenhouse gases and more rapid electrification of energy demand based on renewable energy. Although these alternatives also face specific difficulties, they are found to significantly reduce the need for CDR, but not fully eliminate it. The alternatives offer a means to diversify transition pathways to meet the Paris Agreement targets, while simultaneously benefiting other sustainability goals.

No abstract

Reducing hunger while staying within planetary boundaries of pollution, land use and fresh water use is one of the most urgent sustainable development goals. It is imperative to understand future food demand, the agricultural system, and the interactions with other natural and human systems. Studying such interactions in the long-term future is often done with Integrated Assessment Modelling. In this paper we develop a new food demand model to make projections several decades ahead, having 46 detailed food categories and population segmented by income and urban vs rural. The core of our model is a set of relationships between income and dietary patterns, with differences between regions and income inequalities within a region. Hereby we take a different, more long-term-oriented approach than elasticity-based macroeconomic models (Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) and Partial Equilibrium (PE) models). The physical and detailed nature of our model allows for fine-grained scenario exploration. We first apply the model to the newly developed Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) scenarios, and then to additional sustainable development scenarios of food waste reduction and dietary change. We conclude that total demand for crops and grass could increase roughly 35-165% between 2010 and 2100, that this future demand growth can be tempered more effectively by replacing animal products than by reducing food waste, and that income-based consumption inequality persists and is a contributing factor to our estimate that 270 million people could still be undernourished in 2050.

The literature emphasizes the important relationships between the consumption and production of food, energy and water, and environmental challenges such as climate change and loss of biodiversity. New tools are needed to analyse the future dynamics of this nexus. Here, we introduce a set of model-based scenarios and associated Sankey diagrams that enable analysis of the relevant relationships and dynamics, as well as the options to formulate response strategies. The scenarios show that if no new policies are adopted, food production and energy generation could further increase by around 60%, and water consumption by around 20% over the period 2015-2050, leading to further degradation of resources and increasing environmental pressure. Response strategies in terms of climate policies, higher agricultural yields, dietary change and reduction of food waste are analysed to reveal how they may contribute to reversing these trends, and possibly even lead to a reduction of land use in the future.

Recent years have shown increased awareness that the use of the basic resources water, food, and energy are highly interconnected (referred to as a 'nexus'). Spatial scales are an important but complicating factor in nexus analyses, and should receive more attentionespecially in the policy-oriented literature. In this paper, we 'unpack' the nexus concept, aiming to understand the differences between water, food and energy resources, especially in terms of spatial scales. We use physical indicators to show the differences in terms of absolute magnitude of production and the distance and volume of physical trade, for seven resource categories: water withdrawal, crops, animal products, bio-energy, coal, oil, and natural gas. We hypothesize that the differences in trade extent are related to physical characteristics of these resources: we expect high priced, high density, geographically concentrated resources to be traded more and over longer distances. We found that these factors, taken together, can explain some of the differences in trade extent (and thus spatial scale involved), although for each individual factor there are exceptions. We further explore the spatial scales by showing the bidirectional physical trade flows at the continental scale for crops, animal products, bio-energy and fossil fuels. We also visualize how nexus resources are directly dependent on each other, using a Sankey diagram. Since both direct dependencies and physical trade are present, we investigate the role of resource-saving imports, which is a form of virtual trade. The resource-saving imports highlight the importance of continental and global scales for nexus analyses.