Projected water consumption in future global agriculture: scenarios and related impacts.

Global stress on water and land resources is increasing as a consequence of population growth and higher caloric food demand. Many terrestrial ecosystems have already massively been degraded for providing agricultural land, and water scarcity related to irrigation has damaged water dependent ecosystems. Coping with the food and biomass demand of an increased population, while minimizing the impacts of crop production, is therefore a massive upcoming challenge. In this context, we developed four strategies to deliver the biotic output for feeding mankind in 2050. Expansion on suitable and intensification of existing areas are compared to assess associated environmental impacts, including irrigation demand, water stress under climate change, and the productivity of the occupied land. Based on the agricultural production pattern and impacts of the strategies we identified the trade-offs between land and water use. Intensification in regions currently under deficit irrigation can increase agricultural output by up to 30%. However, intensified crop production causes enormous water stress in many locations and might not be a viable solution. Furthermore, intensification alone will not be able to meet future food demand: additionally, a reduction of waste by 50% along the food supply chain or expansion of agricultural land is required for satisfying current per-capita meat and bioenergy consumption. Suitable areas for such expansion are mainly located in Africa, followed by South America. The increased land stress is of smaller concern than the water stress modeled for the intensification case. Therefore, a combination of waste reduction with expansion on suitable pastures generally results as the best option, along with some intensification on selected areas. Our results suggested that minimizing environmental impacts requires fundamental changes in agricultural systems and international cooperation, by producing crops where it is most environmentally efficient and not where it is closest to demand or cheapest.