Modeling the Impacts of Agricultural Support Policies on Emissions from Agriculture
To understand the impacts of support programs on global emissions, this paper considers the impacts of domestic subsidies, price distortions at the border, and investments in emission-reducing technologies on global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions f...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Working Paper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/694451599729050318/Modeling-the-Impacts-of-Agricultural-Support-Policies-on-Emissions-from-Agriculture http://hdl.handle.net/10986/34453 |
| Summary: | To understand the impacts of support
programs on global emissions, this paper considers the
impacts of domestic subsidies, price distortions at the
border, and investments in emission-reducing technologies on
global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from agriculture. It
uses a counterfactual global model scenario showing how much
emissions from agricultural production would change if
agricultural support were abolished worldwide. The analysis
indicates that, without subsidies paid directly to farmers,
output of emission-intensive activities and emissions would
be smaller. Without trade protection, however, emissions
would be higher. This is because protection reduces global
demand more than it increases supply, and partly because
some countries that currently tax agriculture have high
emission intensities. Policies that directly reduce emission
intensities yield much larger reductions in emissions than
those targeting overall productivity growth to reduce
emissions because of the rebound effect. Scenario analysis
to understand the impacts of repurposed agricultural policy
and support measures on mitigation of greenhouse gas
emissions and adaptation to climate change is being
undertaken in subsequent work, which will also take account
of land-use change and alternative forms of agricultural
support to align objectives of food security, farmers’
income security, production efficiency and resilience, and
environmental protection. |
|---|