Land Use Change and European Biofuel Policies. David Laborde Debucquet -

Transcription

1 Land Use Change and Eurpean Bifuel Plicies David Labrde Debucquet - d.labrde@cgiar.rg The views expressed by the authr are nt thse f IFPRI r the Eurpean Cmmissin Page 2 Why Bifuels? Energy plicy? Energy Security Energy prices Current accunt cncerns Farm plicy? A silver bullet vs the WTO discipline An envirnmental plicy? Rad transprtatin prduces emissins If the latter, then Land Use Changes matter!

2 The cre stry Use f Mdel New Demand fr crps Page 3 A few facts: Why ILUC exists and the rle f internatinal Trade Page 4

3 Evlutin f the EU bidiesel prductin (different scale) Page 5 External trade EU 27 Imprts and Exprts Rape seed Surge f rape seeds imprts: 2011/2012: 3.8Mt Tns (mre than 15% f EU prductin) Preamble: iluc r LUC An imprtant and sensitive plicy issue An issue that mst mdels will never address: the spatial dimensin Few empirical evidences abut the relevance f the discriminatin What matters is the net effects Simple arithmetic in the mdel: TOTAL LUC = direct LUC + indirect LUC ASSUMPTION: EU legislatin wrks! Direct LUC is frbidden dluc=0 TOTAL LUC = 0 + iluc The mdel cmputes the Ttal LUC and therefre we can get iluc estimates. Page 6

4 Simulatin Design Page 7 Mdeling Bifuels in MIRAGE Bif MIRAGE mdel: A Cmputable General Equlibrium Mdel Multi cuntry, Multi sectral, and glbal Recursive dynamic set-up Mdified mdel and data cmpnents Imprvement in demand system (fd and energy) Imprved sectr disaggregatin New mdeling f ethanl sectrs C-prducts f ethanls and vegetable ils New mdeling f fertilizers New mdeling f livestcks (extensificatin/intensificatin) Land market and land extensins at the AEZ level The mdel has been reviewed by different parties and publicatins based n the mdel are available in key academic jurnals. Rle f the baseline

5 Scenaris and sensitivity analysis Central scenaris Bifuel mandate: Member states Actin Plan Trade plicy ptins: Status Qu Full Liberalizatin in the EU f Ethanl and Bidiesel Sensitivity Analysis On linearity/nn linearity issue Estimatin f crp LUC at a half mandate, at a full mandate But still weak n Ethanl: n saturatin effects On fd cnsumptin Endgenus vs Fixed t Baseline level On C-prducts: with r withut Mnte Carl simulatins n selected parameters But in reality, much mre uncertainties (see Bx 2, 25 items related t LUC, but even mre regarding net emissins ) Abut the land (amunt, lcatin, carbn values) Abut future technlgies Bth behaviral and technical uncertainties Page 9 Results Page 10

6 Additinal EU cnsumptin frm 2008 t 2020 driven by NREAP: +16 Mte (t reach 27.2 Mte) Page 11 The LUC dmin effect Origin f LUC CO2 emissins (additinal mandate) Change in Crpland (additinal mandate) Page 12

7 g / J y hrizn If cnsidering il leakage effects Ttal Land Use Emissins: 495 MtC2 fr 15.5 MTe Page 13 Understanding the results Why Differences? Differences n the supply respnse Lcatin Yield respnse Differences in the demand side Rle f Cprducts Capacity t reduce existing demand Frm the livestck sectrs Frm the ther industries Frm the final cnsumers Differences in type f land cnverted Initial land cver Carbn stcks Sensitivity Analysis Page 14

8 Plicy Recmmendatins 1. Land use changes driven by bifuel plicies are a serius cncern. This finding is rbust as mre than 99 percent f crp LUC cefficients in the Mnte Carl analysis are psitive. 2. LUC regulatin and the Pandra Bx: LUC fr all, LUC fr nne? The real challenge is t prmte better land use practices fr agriculture widely. Bifuels remain a minr cmpnent in ttal land use changes. 3. Reducing the bifuel ambitin is still the mst direct way t limit additinal land use emissins (evlutin f plitical ecnmy due t supply cnstraint in the EU) 4. Crp specific LUC can be difficult t implement. Increasing the minimal requirements f direct savings can be a better slutin and will prvide incentives fr the sectr t adpt the mst efficient pathway. 5. Despite all uncertainties, ur findings shw the hierarchy between ethanl and bidiesel in terms f LUC. Additinal breakdwn can be cnsidered. Therefre, prmting a larger share f ethanl than the current prjectin will be meaningful. Rle f trade liberalizatin 6. Alternative trade plicy ptins may be develped t prmte gd practices in terms f land cnservatin at a natinal level by trade partners (sustainability criteria, TRQ); 7. Using available technlgies t increase yield e.g. bitech, and lw carbn agricultural practices t reduce emissins; 8. Health check fr bifuel plicies and needs t have a flexible framewrk. Page 15