Suppr超能文献

全球市场一体化增加了未来非洲绿色革命可能增加耕地使用和二氧化碳排放的可能性。

Global market integration increases likelihood that a future African Green Revolution could increase crop land use and CO2 emissions.

作者信息

Hertel Thomas W, Ramankutty Navin, Baldos Uris Lantz C

机构信息

Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907; and

Department of Geography, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada H3A 0B9.

出版信息

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Sep 23;111(38):13799-804. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1403543111. Epub 2014 Sep 8.

Abstract

There has been a resurgence of interest in the impacts of agricultural productivity on land use and the environment. At the center of this debate is the assertion that agricultural innovation is land sparing. However, numerous case studies and global empirical studies have found little evidence of higher yields being accompanied by reduced area. We find that these studies overlook two crucial factors: estimation of a true counterfactual scenario and a tendency to adopt a regional, rather than a global, perspective. This paper introduces a general framework for analyzing the impacts of regional and global innovation on long run crop output, prices, land rents, land use, and associated CO2 emissions. In so doing, it facilitates a reconciliation of the apparently conflicting views of the impacts of agricultural productivity growth on global land use and environmental quality. Our historical analysis demonstrates that the Green Revolution in Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East was unambiguously land and emissions sparing, compared with a counterfactual world without these innovations. In contrast, we find that the environmental impacts of a prospective African Green Revolution are potentially ambiguous. We trace these divergent outcomes to relative differences between the innovating region and the rest of the world in yields, emissions efficiencies, cropland supply response, and intensification potential. Globalization of agriculture raises the potential for adverse environmental consequences. However, if sustained for several decades, an African Green Revolution will eventually become land sparing.

摘要

农业生产力对土地利用和环境的影响再度引发了人们的关注。这场辩论的核心观点是,农业创新能够节约土地。然而,众多案例研究和全球实证研究几乎没有发现产量提高伴随着耕地面积减少的证据。我们发现,这些研究忽略了两个关键因素:对真实反事实情景的估计以及采用区域而非全球视角的倾向。本文介绍了一个通用框架,用于分析区域和全球创新对长期作物产量、价格、土地租金、土地利用及相关二氧化碳排放的影响。这样做有助于调和关于农业生产力增长对全球土地利用和环境质量影响的明显相互冲突的观点。我们的历史分析表明,与没有这些创新的反事实世界相比,亚洲、拉丁美洲和中东的绿色革命无疑是节约土地和减少排放的。相比之下,我们发现未来非洲绿色革命对环境的影响可能并不明确。我们将这些不同的结果归因于创新地区与世界其他地区在产量、排放效率、农田供应反应和集约化潜力方面的相对差异。农业全球化增加了产生不利环境后果的可能性。然而,如果持续几十年,非洲绿色革命最终将实现土地节约。

相似文献

1
Global market integration increases likelihood that a future African Green Revolution could increase crop land use and CO2 emissions.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Sep 23;111(38):13799-804. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1403543111. Epub 2014 Sep 8.
2
Green Revolution research saved an estimated 18 to 27 million hectares from being brought into agricultural production.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 May 21;110(21):8363-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1208065110. Epub 2013 May 13.
3
Impact of transnational land acquisitions on local food security and dietary diversity.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Jan 26;118(4). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2020535118.
4
Global cropland and greenhouse gas impacts of UK food supply are increasingly located overseas.
J R Soc Interface. 2016 Jan;13(114):20151001. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2015.1001.
5
Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change.
Science. 2008 Feb 29;319(5867):1238-40. doi: 10.1126/science.1151861. Epub 2008 Feb 7.
6
Climate change effects on agriculture: economic responses to biophysical shocks.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Mar 4;111(9):3274-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1222465110. Epub 2013 Dec 16.
7
Adaptation of global land use and management intensity to changes in climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Glob Chang Biol. 2018 Jul;24(7):2791-2809. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14110. Epub 2018 Mar 24.
8
Agricultural Green Revolution as a driver of increasing atmospheric CO2 seasonal amplitude.
Nature. 2014 Nov 20;515(7527):394-7. doi: 10.1038/nature13893.
9
Crop intensification, land use, and on-farm energy-use efficiency during the worldwide spread of the green revolution.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Mar 6;115(10):2335-2340. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1717072115. Epub 2018 Feb 20.
10
Implications of limiting CO2 concentrations for land use and energy.
Science. 2009 May 29;324(5931):1183-6. doi: 10.1126/science.1168475.

引用本文的文献

1
Adoption of improved crop varieties limited biodiversity losses, terrestrial carbon emissions, and cropland expansion in the tropics.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Feb 11;122(6):e2404839122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2404839122. Epub 2025 Feb 3.
2
Sustainable high-yield farming is essential for bending the curve of biodiversity loss.
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2025 Jan 9;380(1917):20230216. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2023.0216.
3
Opportunities for carbon sequestration from removing or intensifying pasture-based beef production.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024 Nov 12;121(46):e2405758121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2405758121. Epub 2024 Nov 4.
4
Coupled analysis of arable land input intensity and output intensity based on sliding windows.
MethodsX. 2024 Jul 23;13:102862. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2024.102862. eCollection 2024 Dec.
5
Carbon opportunity cost increases carbon footprint advantage of grain-finished beef.
PLoS One. 2023 Dec 13;18(12):e0295035. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295035. eCollection 2023.
6
Sustainable irrigation and climate feedbacks.
Nat Food. 2023 Aug;4(8):654-663. doi: 10.1038/s43016-023-00821-x. Epub 2023 Aug 17.
7
A sustainable future for Africa through continental free trade and agricultural development.
Nat Food. 2022 Aug;3(8):608-618. doi: 10.1038/s43016-022-00572-1. Epub 2022 Aug 18.
8
The impact of agricultural trade approaches on global economic modeling.
Glob Environ Change. 2022 Mar;73:1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102413.
9
Extension services can promote pasture restoration: Evidence from Brazil's low carbon agriculture plan.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022 Mar 22;119(12):e2114913119. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2114913119. Epub 2022 Mar 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Green Revolution research saved an estimated 18 to 27 million hectares from being brought into agricultural production.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 May 21;110(21):8363-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1208065110. Epub 2013 May 13.
2
Agricultural intensification escalates future conservation costs.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 May 7;110(19):7601-6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1220070110. Epub 2013 Apr 15.
3
Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Dec 13;108(50):20260-4. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1116437108. Epub 2011 Nov 21.
4
Solutions for a cultivated planet.
Nature. 2011 Oct 12;478(7369):337-42. doi: 10.1038/nature10452.
5
Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: land sharing and land sparing compared.
Science. 2011 Sep 2;333(6047):1289-91. doi: 10.1126/science.1208742.
6
Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming land scarcity.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Mar 1;108(9):3465-72. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1100480108. Epub 2011 Feb 14.
7
Trading carbon for food: global comparison of carbon stocks vs. crop yields on agricultural land.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Nov 16;107(46):19645-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1011078107. Epub 2010 Nov 1.
8
Greenhouse gas mitigation by agricultural intensification.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jun 29;107(26):12052-7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0914216107. Epub 2010 Jun 15.
9
The agroecological matrix as alternative to the land-sparing/agriculture intensification model.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Mar 30;107(13):5786-91. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0905455107. Epub 2010 Mar 25.
10
Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people.
Science. 2010 Feb 12;327(5967):812-8. doi: 10.1126/science.1185383. Epub 2010 Jan 28.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验