Global Futures and Strategic Foresight and the IMPACT

Global Futures and Strategic Foresight and the IMPACT Model Keith Wiebe International Food Policy Research Institute Workshop on Integrating Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services into Foresight Models Bioversity, Rome 7 -8 May 2015

1. Improved modeling tools • Complete recoding of IMPACT version 3 • Disaggregation geographically and by commodity • Improved water & crop models • New data management system • Modular framework • Training

2. Stronger community of practice • 13 CGIAR centers now participating in GFSF • IFPRI, Bioversity, CIAT, CIMMYT, CIP, ICARDA, ICRAF, ICRISAT, IITA, ILRI, IRRI, IWMI, World. Fish • Collaboration with other leading global economic modeling groups through Ag. MIP

3. Improved assessments • Role of agricultural technologies • Africa regional reports • Analyses by CGIAR centers • CCAFS regional studies • Ag. MIP global economic assessments

4. Informing decision making • CGIAR centers • CGIAR Research Programs • RTB, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes; Maize, Wheat, Dryland Systems, Livestock & Fish… • National partners • MENA, S & SE Asia, Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia • Regional organizations • ASARECA, COMESA, CORAF/WECARD, FANRPAN, FARA, FLAR • International organizations and donors • OECD, FAO, ADB, IFAD, WB, BMGF, DFID, USDA

The IMPACT Global Simulation Model • International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade • Global partial equilibrium model • • • Multimarket model Water models Crop models Livestock model Malnutrition model 6

IMPACT Model – Schematic 7

What is new in IMPACT 3? • Geographic and crop disaggregation (2005 base year) • 58 agricultural commodities • Prices and markets • Three markets: farm gate, national, international • Tradability: traded and non-traded commodities • Land allocation to crops • Activity-commodity value chain framework • New water models: hydrology, water basin management, water stress on crops • Modularity of the IMPACT model “system” 8

IMPACT 3 Geography 159 154 320 • Countries • Water Basins • Food Production Units 9

Baseline model drivers and results • Core drivers: population, GDP, land • Changes in technology • Climate change: • Suite of Global Circulation Models (GCMs) of climate change • Different assumptions about climate drivers: socioeconomic and greenhouse gas pathways 10

Note: Average of 4 GCMs under SSP 2 and RCP 8. 5 Source: IFPRI IMPACT simulations

2050 Wheat Yields: Climate Change Effects for Top 10 Wheat Producers Source: IMPACT 3 (2014) 12

Note: Average of 4 GCMs under SSP 2 and RCP 8. 5 Source: IFPRI IMPACT simulations

Source: Nelson et al. , PNAS (2014)

Baseline results for SSP 1, 2 and 3 Baseline increases in global yields, area, production, consumption, exports, imports and prices of coarse grains, rice, wheat, oilseeds and sugar in 2050 (% change relative to 2005 values) Source: Work in progress by IFPRI, PIK, USDA-ERS, LEI-WUR, GTAP/Purdue, FAO, IDS

Climate change impacts in 2050 Climate change impacts on global yields, area, production, consumption, exports, imports and prices of coarse grains, rice, wheat, oilseeds and sugar in 2050 (% change relative to 2050 baseline values) Source: Work in progress by IFPRI, PIK, USDA-ERS, LEI-WUR, GTAP/Purdue, FAO, IDS

Climate change impacts and trade Impacts of climate change and trade policy on yields, area, production, exports and prices of five commodities, (% deviation from baseline values in 2050 without climate change) SSP 1, RCP 4. 5 SSP 3, RCP 8. 5 Source: Work in progress by IFPRI, PIK, USDA-ERS, LEI-WUR, GTAP/Purdue, FAO, IDS

The role of agricultural technologies • Baseline to 2050, including climate change • Linked crop models and economic models • Assessed 11 technologies for maize, rice and wheat • Impacts on prices, yields, risk of hunger, resource use, efficiency Source: IFPRI (2014)

Global DSSAT Results Yield Change (%) – Maize, Rice, & Wheat, 2050 vs. Baseline Source: Rosegrant et al. 2014.

Efficient use of resources: Change (%) in N Productivity – Maize, Rice, Wheat. Irrigated vs. Rainfed, 2050 vs. Baseline (DSSAT) (Compared to the business-as-usual) Benefits include reduced N losses, increased N productivity. Source: Rosegrant et al. 2014. 29% less nitrogen losses 28% more N productivity

Efficient use of resources : Change in Site-specific Water Use – Irrigated Maize, Wheat (Compared to the conventional furrow irrigation) 28% less water applied Prominent impacts of 22% more water productivity Improved Irrigation Technologies § Increased water savings (less water used) § Increased water productivity (more biomass produced per unit water input) Source: Rosegrant et al. 2014.

Percent Change in Cultivated Area, Developing Countries & Latin America : 2050 MIROCA 1 B - Technology vs. Baseline Source: Rosegrant et al. 2014.

Other environmental impacts Flachsbarth et al. (2015) • Water footprints • Nitrogen emission rates • Changes in carbon stocks • Risk of species extinction

Concluding thoughts • Foresight modeling is a work in progress • Currently working on a number of improvements • land use, livestock, fish, nutrition, health, environmental indicators (upstream and downstream) • Collaboration is critical • To strengthen tools • To strengthen ownership and understanding • Need to recognize limitations • Goal is to inform decisions • Results are the beginning of discussion, not the end

Thank you k. wiebe@cgiar. org