Presentation from IFPRI-led side event at Rio+20 Conference Presenter: Claudia Ringler, IFPRI

1. Feeding the World: Sustainable Agriculture &
Innovation in the 21st Century
How to Achieve Food Security in a
World of Growing Scarcity:
Role of Technology Development
Strategies
Claudia Ringler, International
Food Policy Research Institute
Rio + 20 Official Side Event
RioCentro, June 16, 2012

2. The State of Food Security
 One billion food
insecure
 Rising/fluctuating food
prices
 Scarcity of land and
water
 Competition from
bioenergy
 Climate change

3. Drivers of Agricultural Growth and
Food Security
Demand drivers
 Population growth: 9 billion people in 2050
 Urbanization: 2010 = 52% urban; 2050 = 78%
urban
 Income growth
 Biofuels and bioenergy
• GHG mitigation and carbon sequestration
• Conservation and biodiversity

4. -10
100
0
20
40
50
60
70
80
90
10
30
1975-80
1980-85
1985-90
World
1990-95
Europe
1995-00
2000-05
2005-10
2010-15
2015-20
Least developed Region
2020-25
2025-30
2030-35
2035-40
2040-45
2045-50
by region
2050-55
2055-60
2060-65
2065-70
North America
2070-75
2075-80
2080-85
Less developed Region
2085-90
2090-95
Source: UN (2011)
Number of people added annually,
2095-00

5. Drivers of Agricultural Growth and
Food Security
Supply drivers
 Water and land scarcity
 Climate change
 Investment in agricultural research
 Science and technology policy
 Management and governance reform

6. Impact of Climate Change in 2050
Rainfed maize (MIROC/A1B)
Overall production change in shown
existing areas: -11.2%
Source: IFPRI IMPACT simulations (Nelson et al. 2010)

7. Major Consequences
 Rapid growth in meat consumption and
demand for grains for feed
 Half of growth in grain demand will be for
livestock
 Significant water/land use for energy production
 Intense pressure on land and water
 Decreasing crop productivity
 Increase in prices for cereals and meats
 Impact on caloric availability
 Impact on food security for those who spend a
large share of their income on food

8. Large number of international land deals,
chiefly focused on biofuels & agriculture
Source: http://landportal.info/landmatrix

9. Projected increase in per capita
meat consumption
2000 2000-2050
Latin Am /
Carib 58 19
N Am /
Europe 83 4
East + South
Asia / Pacific
28 24
Subsaharan
Africa 11 13
Central and
W Asia / 20 11
N Africa
0 20 40 60 80 100
kg/person per year
Source: IFPRI IMPACT Simulations

10. Productivity Issues: R&D
 Growth rate of yields has been slowing in response to
a slowdown of agriculture R&D spending

11. Agricultural Technologies
Potential to improve:
 Agricultural production &
consumption
 Food security
 Trade
 Environmental quality
Stalled by:
 Polarized debate on high
intensity vs. low input
 Lack of understanding of
the impacts of specific
technologies at a
disaggregated level

12. Technology Assessment Scope
 Global & Regional • Zero Tillage
 Nine Technologies • Integrated Soil Fertility
Management
 Three Crops • Irrigation Technologies
• Wheat • Water Harvesting
• Rice • Drought Tolerance
• Heat tolerance
• Maize
• Nitrogen Use Efficiency
• Precision Agriculture
• Laser Land Leveling
• Organic Agriculture

13. E-survey (300 experts)
Typology of Respondents and Answers
352 exploitable answers
Technologies / Crops Maize Rice Wheat Total
Conventional breeding: heat and drought tolerance 16 7 12 35
Conventional breeding: nitrogen use efficiency 4 2 2 8
Genetically modified crops: Bt maize 37 37
Genetically modified crops: heat and drought tolerance 9 4 6 19
Genetically modified crops: nitrogen use efficiency 2 2 4
Integrated soil fertility management 38 11 8 57
Drip/sprinkler irrigation 12 3 3 18
Furrow irrigation 10 10 5 25
Laser land leveling 3 1 4
Organic agriculture 29 11 5 45
Precision agriculture 10 7 9 26
Water harvesting 15 4 4 23
Zero tillage 34 6 11 51
Total 214 70 68 352
60% maize, 20% rice, 20% wheat

14. Results – Impacts on Yields
Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

15. Results – Impacts on Production Costs
Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

16. Profitability Results – by Crop / Region
Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

17. Results – Impacts on Soil Erosion
Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

18. Results – Impacts on Water Quality
Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

19. Results – Impacts on Energy Consumption
Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

20. Results – Impacts on Fertilizer Use
Source: IFPRI e-survey 2011

21. DSSAT – Crop Modeling System

22. DSSAT – crop modeling system
MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL
Improved variety
10 Planting in November
PRACTICES CONDITIONS 8
 Crop choice  Climate Regional/Site-specific 6
 Cropping – Historic (1901-2005) yield responses 4
– Future (2030s,
 Planting
2
2050s, 2080s) Yield
(t/ha)
0
 Inorganic fertilizer – CO2 concentration 100
80
 Soil quality
60
 Organic
40
40 20
20 0 Irrigation
N Fertilizer Application
N/A
amendment  Land-use history
(kg[N]/ha) Threshold (%)
 Irrigation
 Tillage OUTPUTS
 Residue  Biomass
 Yield
 Harvest
 Water balance and
productivity
 Nitrogen balance
and productivity
 Soil carbon
sequestration

23. Management Scenarios
 Baseline
• Site-specific baseline inorganic fertilizer application rate
• For maize, location-specific yield discount factor due to
unmanaged pest damage where Bt maize is not adopted
• Furrow irrigation, where irrigation is adopted
• Sub-optimal planting density & sub-optimal planting window
• Conventional tillage
• Representative varieties for latitude x altitude zones
 Technology scenarios
• Specific representation of each technology
• Area of adoption in 2050 depends on technology
 Climate change scenario in 2050
• MIROC A1B (without CO2 fertilization)

24. Measure of Technology Yield Impact (%) in
2050
For a given country,
 If technology is new (i.e. not adopted in 2000)
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2050 − 𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2050
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 % = × 100
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑡𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2000
 If technology already adopted in 2000 (=baseline)
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2050
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 % = × 100
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑊𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ,2000
– Bt maize: Brazil, USA, Argentina, China, India
– No-till: Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil, Australia, Uruguay, New
Zealand

25. Yield change (%), Global effect in 2050 (MIROC A1B)
(-28.8)
(-18.9)
(-13.5)
Numbers in brackets indicate water savings; assumption was that water demands can be fully met
Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

26. Yield change (%), Global effect in 2050 (MIROC A1B)
Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

27. IRRIGATED
MAIZE
INTEGRATED
SOIL
FERTILITY
MANAGEMENT
Yield Impact (%)
< -70
-69 - -60
-59 - -50
-49 - -40
-39 - -30
RAINFED
-29 - -20
-19 - -15
-14 - -10
-9 - -5
-4 - 0
1-5
6 - 10
11 - 15
16 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
> 70

28. Yield change (%), Latin America & Caribbean in 2050 (MIROC A1B)
Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

29. IRRIGATED
WHEAT
PRECISION
AGRICULTURE
Yield Impact (%)
< -70
-69 - -60
-59 - -50
-49 - -40
-39 - -30
RAINFED
-29 - -20
-19 - -15
-14 - -10
-9 - -5
-4 - 0
1-5
6 - 10
11 - 15
16 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
51 - 60
61 - 70
> 70
Source: IFPRI crop model results 2012

30. Linking DSSAT & IMPACT
DSSAT IMPACT
Technology strategy
(combination of Food demand
different practices) and supply
Effects on
Global prices
Corresponding and trade
geographically Food security
differentiated yield and
effects malnutrition

31. Percent Change in World Prices of
Maize between 2010 and 2050
Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

32. Percent Change in World Prices of
Rice between 2000 and 2050
Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

33. Percent Change in World Prices of
Wheat between 2010 and 2050
Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

34. Percent Change in kilocalorie availability per capita
per day between 2010 and 2050
Percent change from 2010 to 2050
12.0%
10.0%
Reference (MIROC A1b)
8.0% Drought Tolerance
Heat Tolerance
Integrated SFM
6.0%
No Till
N Use Efficiency
4.0% Precision Ag
2.0%
0.0%
Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

35. Percent Change in the Number of Malnourished
Children 2050, compared to reference run
Percent difference from reference in 2050
0.0%
-0.5%
-1.0%
-1.5% Drought Tolerance
Heat Tolerance
-2.0%
Integrated SFM
-2.5% No Till
N Use Efficiency
-3.0%
Precision Ag
-3.5%
-4.0%
-4.5%
-5.0%
Source: IFPRI IMPACT results 2012

36. Conclusions
 Agricultural technology investments—including
both “advanced” and “traditional”
technologies/management practices are a game
changer in terms of yield improvements
and national and global food security
 We now can model disaggregated/locale-specific
technology impacts
 While biophysical potential often exists to
significantly increase yields, institutions,
governance systems, political will, and poor rural
infrastructure remain obstacles to achieving the
full technological potential